Amsterdam, The Netherlands – Greenpeace International’s landmark anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Energy Transfer took another step forward in the Amsterdam District Court, today. The hearing reviewed the pipeline company’s latest attempt to avoid accountability under Dutch law and the European Union’s anti-SLAPP directive for back-to-back abusive lawsuits filed in the US.[1] Netherlands-based Greenpeace International is seeking legal recognition that Energy Transfer has acted unlawfully as well as relief from the harm that has resulted. The Court said it would make a decision by 3 June 2026 on Energy Transfer’s plea for dismissal or pause of the anti-SLAPP lawsuit.[2]  

Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International, Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer cannot hide from justice — no matter how hard they try. Greenpeace International is holding this Big Oil bully accountable under Dutch and EU law for repeated attempts at silencing our free speech. We will continue to resist all forms of intimidation and believe Energy Transfer will have to answer for its actions here in the Netherlands.”

“With the world’s continued dependence on fossil fuels wreaking havoc around the globe, Greenpeace International’s anti-SLAPP landmark case against Energy Transfer is bigger than us: This is about stopping corporations from weaponising the courts against anyone who dares to speak out for the public good.” 

Energy Transfer’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US (Greenpeace Inc. and Greenpeace Fund) remain blatant attempts to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with the ongoing, peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline.[3] These are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees and ultimately silence dissent. 

Daniel Simons, Senior Legal Counsel Strategic Defense, Greenpeace International said: “Energy Transfer continues attempting to evade accountability because it knows it cannot justify its repeated abusive lawsuits. We feel confident the court will allow Greenpeace International’s anti-SLAPP case to proceed on the merits and that Energy Transfer will face justice. We carry on this legal fight to remedy the harms suffered as a result of Energy Transfer’s intimidation tactics and to ensure corporate bullies know there is now a price to pay if you bring SLAPP suits.”

In parallel to the anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US continue the legal fight against Energy Transfer’s most recent SLAPP in North Dakota. Following a District Court judgment awarding US$345 million to Energy Transfer in February 2026, the Greenpeace defendants are seeking a new trial and, if necessary, will appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court.[4] 

The 16 April hearing in Greenpeace International’s landmark anti-SLAPP case against Big Oil bully Energy Transfer marks the beginning of a series of organising, marches, and activities around the world collectively called Facing Down Bullies.

ENDS

Photo and video can be found in the Greenpeace Media Library.

Notes 

1. Energy Transfer requested an anti-suit injunction from the North Dakota District Court in July 2025 looking for protection from Greenpeace International’s anti-SLAPP lawsuit in the Netherlands. In September 2025, the North Dakota District Court denied the request. Energy Transfer subsequently appealed that decision to the North Dakota Supreme Court, which has not yet issued a decision. 
2. Energy Transfer has appeared in the anti-SLAPP case, represented by Dutch counsel, and has lodged a preliminary plea, seeking the dismissal of the case arguing that the Amsterdam District Court lacks jurisdiction, and in the alternative, asking for a stay (suspension) of the proceedings until the final outcome of the case in North Dakota. Greenpeace International has lodged its reply. 
3. Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
4. Greenpeace defendants file motion for new trial in North Dakota court.

Contact: 

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org

Join the Greenpeace SLAPP Trial WhatsApp Group for our latest updates

It’s time for facing down bullies. 

When we look at the state of the world, we see a pattern that cannot be ignored: Rights and freedoms are under threat from corporations and from autocrats. People and organisations are targeted for telling the truth, for solidarity, and for defending their communities from corporate extractivism.

People around the world are tired of billionaires and corporate polluters behaving like the law does not apply to them.

Facing down a Big Oil bully in court

Greenpeace International faces Big Oil bully Energy Transfer at the Amsterdam  court on 16 April as part of our landmark anti-SLAPP case to pursue justice in our home territory under Dutch and EU law. 

Energy Transfer has been waging abusive lawsuits against Greenpeace International and Greenpeace in the US for nearly a decade. In February, a North Dakota District Court awarded the US-based pipeline company US$345 million in damages. These SLAPPs are blatant attempts to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. 

They want us — and all climate activists — to be scared by their corporate intimidation tactics. But their tactics won’t succeed. We have already filed a motion for a new trial in the US and will, if necessary, appeal. 

Energy Transfer is desperate to avoid this case. Of course they are. Bullies always think they can get away with anything.

Why this anti-SLAPP case matters for activists everywhere

This landmark anti-SLAPP lawsuit – invoking the European Union’s new directive for the first time – sends a clear message to every bully, billionaire, and corporate polluter: your era of intimidation is over, and your tactics of fear will no longer work.

And it also sends a message to our allies: that it is time to resist. We know we are strongest together, and we know we can win this legal fight.

At the end of the day, this case is about a simple, undeniable truth: that power belongs to the people. It cannot be hijacked by bullies — and it certainly cannot be bought by oligarchs.

We are shining a light on the global threat of SLAPPs.

We will make sure this bully understands that its intimidation attempts are failing.

And we want any corporations thinking of using a lawsuit as a weapon to know these tactics will  backfire.

We stand firm. We stand together. And we will not be silenced.

Resist Corporate Intimidation

Send a message to all corporate bullies that you’re part of a growing movement resisting corporate intimidation.

Make a Time to Resist Banner

Shockwaves have reverberated around the world in the month since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran and then Lebanon. People in the Middle East are again paying with their lives for wars fuelled by fossil interests and geopolitical power plays. 

And around the world, we feel the secondary shocks, as the fallout impacts the normal movement of people, and trade of commerce, energy, and resources. Today, we share in uncertainty, anxious about the end of the violence and the depth of the crisis, as we continue to watch horrors unfold in short-form video, and endless scroll through our days, and in nervous texts and calls from colleagues and friends.

Greenpeace is calling for an immediate end to military violence, a return to international law, and diplomatic solutions. 

Concern around the secondary impact in China of the US and Israel’s strikes on Iran is rising, as the imported inflation is causing some anxiety. The shockwaves on energy systems have felt buffered, in part by the prevalence of renewable energy in China and the widespread use of electric vehicles, which are not dependent on oil.

But overall, China’s energy mix remains fossil fuel-dependent. And this crisis has shown how dependence on fossil fuels is a risk. As illegal wars continue to devastate innocent lives, degrading the global geopolitical mandate for peace that emerged from the ashes of World War II, the fossil fuel interests that have instigated so much of the violence become increasingly volatile in any country.

How wind, solar and electric vehicles help shield China from oil price shocks

“You can’t blow up the sun,” my colleague Julien Jreissati, Programme Director at Greenpeace Middle East and North Africa, wrote in the days after the US and Israel’s first strikes.

And in China, the widespread electrification of transportation – there are more than 30 million electric vehicles (EVs) on the road in China , offsetting an approximate 430,000 barrels of gasoline every day – and expansive development of wind and solar has been clearly stabilizing. China has built more wind and solar than any other country. And recently, new planning documents have put committed focus into the advancements of a new power system that will enable them to displace reliance on fossil fuels, such as grid‑scale energy storage and smart grids.

At the pace of renewable energy growth and grid updates, China could generate 33% of electricity from renewables by 2028, and 40% of total electricity by 2030.

But this geopolitical crisis now puts China at a crossroads, putting more pressure on a decision that Beijing has delayed for some time: when to systematically leave coal behind and make renewable energy the backbone of China’s energy system.

EV boom and falling oil demand in China

The expanding electrification of transportation has decreased China’s reliance on fossil fuels.

Greenpeace East Asia has an office in Beijing, where almost one in every six vehicles on the street is a new energy vehicle. The booming of EVs has reduced fossil fuel consumption in China’s transportation sector. Since 2018, oil consumption (including gasoline and diesel) in China’s transportation sector has begun to decline, and EVs are the major driver of that trend. And it is set to accelerate. The 430,000 barrels of gasoline per day now offset by EV adoption could quadruple by 2040.

The true cost of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles is staggering, and oil price shocks underscore the continued risk of these vehicles. This is just one of a number of trends shifting consumer preference toward EVs. The skyrocketing oil prices should be a wake-up call to the automakers, too, both in China and globally.

How effective can this “clean energy shield” be in protecting China from future fossil fuel price shocks?

My answer is: yes, but China’s renewable energy transition is just kicking off, and coal presents a systemic barrier to stronger adoption of wind and solar.. 

Since 2022, increased calls for “energy security” have been paired with increased build-out of coal power plants. And today, coal still accounts for more than half of China’s energy consumption, relegating wind and solar to only 10% of consumption, even as these renewable energy sources account for 22% of total electricity generation available.

However, I see huge potential from renewable energy to replace coal. China achieved its coal power emission peak in 2025. In the same year, the total power generation from wind and solar was able to meet 100% of China’s total increase in power demand. This means that China already does not need to build more coal power to meet growing power demand. 

Dependence on coal is a critical risk. And it is clear to see that concern around this risk is shared by policymakers in the Chinese government, who have tried to decrease China’s reliance on imported coal.

One clear lesson we should see clearly in the oil price shocks that have emerged from this crisis is that dependence on limited, contested, combustible, and corrupting fossil fuels puts us at risk no matter how much we stockpile. 

Together, more renewable energy and the expanding electrification of key sectors like transportation create a shield that protects China’s economy from the fossil fuel price shocks that many other countries are living through right now. But we can also see how a cautious reliance on coal and outdated ICE automotive manufacturing can actually undermine this shield’s effectiveness.

From Iran to Europe and China, the message is the same: fossil fuel dependence is a permanent risk, and building renewable, decentralised energy systems is the only way to protect people from the next war‑driven energy shock.

Yuan Ying is the Programme Director and Chief China Representative at Greenpeace East Asia, based in Beijing.