VOICED : Fallo a favor de Greenpeace

The video discusses the absence of Russian representation at a tribunal where a ruling favored Greenpeace activists detained in Russia. Moscow rejected the tribunal's decision, claiming it lacked jurisdiction. Despite this, Greenpeace sees the ruling as a victory, asserting their activists acted peacefully. Most activists have been released on bail but still face potential prison sentences.

What was the response of Moscow to the International Tribunal's decision regarding the Greenpeace activists?

• They ignored the decision.

• They rejected the decision.

• They accepted the decision.

• They partially agreed with the decision.

How did Greenpeace view the tribunal's ruling in their favor?

• As a significant victory.

• As a temporary solution.

• As an expected outcome.

• As a minor setback.

What was the stance of Greenpeace regarding the actions of their activists?

• They acted peacefully and legally.

• They acted illegally.

• They acted without any plan.

• They acted violently.

What did Russia do with the Greenpeace activists after the tribunal's decision?

• Deported them.

• Released them unconditionally.

• Kept them in detention.

• Released them on bail.

What could be the potential outcome for the Greenpeace activists still facing legal proceedings in Russia?

• They could be fined.

• They could be acquitted.

• They could be sentenced to several years in prison.

• They could be given community service.