Glasgow Grandmother in court for offering chat in “buffer zone”

  • Christian grandmother Rose Docherty was arrested and criminally charged for holding a sign reading “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want” within 200m of a Glasgow hospital
  • Prosecution back down on “disproportionate” bail conditions; two charges relate to alleged “influencing” within the censorial “buffer zone” 

GLASGOW (19 December 2025) – Glaswegian grandmother Rose Docherty appeared in court, having been criminally charged for holding a sign within 200m of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, reading: 

“Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want.” 

In Scotland, “buffer zones” are enforced within 200m of every hospital, forbidding harassment, intimidation, and “influencing” of anyone seeking to access abortion services.  

“I should not be treated as a criminal for inviting people to chat with me – lending a listening ear."

- Rose Docherty

Docherty, 75, has been charged for “influencing” within the buffer zone, despite only having stood peacefully and silently offering consensual conversation and not having approached any individual, nor making any statement on abortion. 

She is the first person to be charged under Scotland’s new “buffer zone” law, enacted in 2024.

After her arrest, Docherty was held in custody for several hours. She was refused a chair to sit on in her cell, despite making it known that she had a double hip replacement. 

Following the hearing, Docherty said: “I can’t believe I am here today. I simply stood, in love and compassion, offering consensual conversation to anyone who wanted to engage.

Nobody should be criminalised just for offering a chat.

I’d like to thank my legal team, and all who came to be with me today, as well as all those others around the world who have voiced their support.

Conversation is not a crime on the streets of Glasgow.”

In a win for Rose’s liberty, the prosecution today rolled back bail conditions, previously described as “disproportionate” by ADF International, which had prevented Rose from attending an area far wider than the buffer zone itself. 

The next hearing will take place on 13th January 2026.

A case of international concern 

Following the arrest, which was seen on a viral video across the world, the U.S. State Department expressed concern:  

“The arrest of Rose Docherty is another egregious example of the tyrannical suppression of free speech happening across Europe. 

“When 75-year-old grandmothers are being arrested for standing peacefully and offering conversation, common sense and basic civility are under attack. 

“The United States will always speak out against these violations of fundamental rights.” 

Lois McLatchie Miller, Scottish Spokesperson for ADF International, said:

“It is not a crime to have a chat on the streets of Glasgow. Rose merely held a sign offering consensual conversations to other adults in the area. It’s deeply concerning that Scottish policing resources are being ploughed into arresting and prosecuting a peaceful grandmother offering to speak to people in public, rather than focusing on the problems caused by real crime in Glasgow. 

“This is not a case about harassment, intimidation or violent protest – this is simply a peaceful grandmother, who held a sign offering to speak to anyone who would like to engage.” 

The law’s architect, Gillian Mackay MSP, admitted on BBC Scotland earlier this year that the vague prohibitions in the buffer zones law could criminalise someone for praying visibly from a window in their home within the zone, “depending on who’s passing by the window.” 

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance highlighted this law as a particular matter for concern in his Munich Security Conference speech in February of this year. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

UK: Christian woman criminally charged for standing, silently praying  

  • Charitable volunteer Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was previously cleared in court and received a payout from police for being unjustly arrested twice for her silent prayers, has been criminally charged again
  • Vaughan-Spruce will appear in court 29th January, supported by ADF International 

BIRMINGHAM (17 December 2025) – West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service have criminally charged Isabel Vaughan-Spruce because she “stood outside” an abortion facility, where “influence” is prohibited. 

The charitable volunteer has been under investigation since January for engaging in silent prayer on a public street near an abortion facility in Birmingham.  

“Silent prayer - or holding pro-life beliefs - cannot possibly be a crime. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought."

- Isabel Vaughan-Spruce

This is the first charge under the new national “buffer zones”, which came into force in October 2024, under Section 9 of the Public Order Act 2023.  

The Attorney General confirmed on 16th December, in response to a parliamentary question from former Home Secretary Suella Braverman MP about Vaughan-Spruce’s case, that “The Crown Prosecution Service has issued proceedings under Section 9 of the Public Order Act 2023, in relation to one case, since it was commenced on 31 October 2024.” 

Vaughan-Spruce had not yet received information about the criminal charge when this written answer was issued, but was informed hours later in a letter from West Midlands Police. 

All previous court cases regarding the status of silent prayer took place in the context of “buffer zones” enforced by local authorities via Public Spaces Protection Orders, rather than through this new law. 

The new national law prohibits “influencing any person’s decision to access, provide or facilitate abortion services” within 150m of abortion facilities, but does not mention silent prayer specifically.  

CPS guidance on the law stipulates that silent prayer on its own is not enough to meet the threshold of criminality unless it is accompanied by “overt” activity. 

Investigated for a “thoughtcrime” 

On 18 March 2025, West Midlands Police informed Vaughan-Spruce she was under investigation for praying silently near the facility on 27th January, as well as several other subsequent dates. Vaughan-Spruce has been peacefully praying in the same public area on a regular basis for two decades. 

Vaughan-Spruce, with legal support from ADF International, sent numerous requests for clarification in proceeding months as to the status of her case, pointing out that the legislation does not function as a ban on her mere presence or on holding pro-life Christian beliefs.  

Repeated injustice over silent “thoughtcrime” 

In 2023, the charitable volunteer was acquitted in court after being arrested for praying in a local “buffer zone,” under a Public Spaces Protection Order that banned “expressions of approval or disapproval” of abortion. The incident occurred while the abortion facility was closed. The prosecution offered no evidence to support a conviction. 

Despite being cleared of any wrongdoing, Vaughan-Spruce was arrested again for her silent thoughts in the same location weeks later in March 2023, opening an investigation that lasted several months. In August 2024, Vaughan-Spruce successfully challenged her two unjust arrests and received a settlement from West Midlands Police of £13,000. 

On regular occasions, she has been approached by officers and asked if she is praying. Once, she was observed by two officers posted to watch her activities. 

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce commented: 

“Despite being fully vindicated multiple times after being wrongfully arrested for my thoughts, it’s unbelievable that I have yet again been charged for standing in that public area, and holding pro-life beliefs. Silent prayer – or holding pro-life beliefs – cannot possibly be a crime. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought.”  

Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF International, who have supported Vaughan-Spruce’ legal defence, said: 

“’Buffer zones’ are among the most concerning frontiers of censorship in the modern west. We all stand against harassment and abuse, but the ‘buffer zone’ law broadly bans ‘influence’ which is being interpreted by police officers to target innocent people who happen to stand in a certain place and believe a certain thing. We will continue to robustly challenge this unjust censorship, and support Isabel’s right to think and believe freely as is the right of every person in the UK.” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, Jeremiah Igunnubole

FRIDAY: Glasgow Grandmother to appear in court for offering to talk in “buffer zone”

U.S. State Department Applauds Scotland’s Decision to Drop Case Against Pro-Life Grandmother Rose Docherty
  • Christian grandmother Rose Docherty was arrested and criminally charged for holding a sign reading “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want” within 200m of a Glasgow hospital 
  • “The arrest of Rose Docherty is another egregious example of the tyrannical suppression of free speech happening across Europe”, U.S. State Department has warned 
Above: Rose Docherty was arrested after offering consensual conversation in a buffer zone in September 2025.

GLASGOW (17 December 2025) – Glaswegian grandmother Rose Docherty will appear at Glasgow Sheriff Court at her First Hearing on Friday, having been criminally charged for holding a sign within 200m of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, reading: 

“Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want.” 

In Scotland, “buffer zones” are enforced within 200m of every hospital, forbidding harassment, intimidation, and “influencing” of anyone seeking to access abortion services.  

“I should not be treated as a criminal for inviting people to chat with me – lending a listening ear."

- Rose Docherty

Despite only having stood peacefully and silently offering consensual conversation and not having approached any individual, nor making any statement on abortion – Docherty has been charged with breaching the “buffer zone.” 

Following the arrest, which was seen on a viral video across the world, the U.S. State Department expressed concern:  

“The arrest of Rose Docherty is another egregious example of the tyrannical suppression of free speech happening across Europe. 

“When 75-year-old grandmothers are being arrested for standing peacefully and offering conversation, common sense and basic civility are under attack. 

“The United States will always speak out against these violations of fundamental rights.” 

After her arrest, Docherty was held in custody for several hours. She was refused a chair to sit on in her cell, despite making it known that she had a double hip replacement. 

Docherty was charged and released on bail. Stringent bail conditions prevent her from attending an area marked out to be wider than the initial “buffer zone” area, in a move the legal team at ADF International call “disproportionate”.  

Reacting to her arrest, Rose Docherty said: 

“Everybody has the right to engage in consensual conversation. I held my sign with love and compassion, inviting anyone who wants to chat, to do so – and stood peacefully, not approaching anyone.  

“I should not be treated as a criminal for inviting people to chat with me – lending a listening ear. Conversation is not forbidden on the streets of Glasgow. And yet, this is the second time I have been arrested for doing just that.”

Legal Counsel for ADF International, Jeremiah Igunnubole commented: 

“It’s deeply concerning that Scottish policing resources are being ploughed into arresting and prosecuting a peaceful grandmother offering to speak to people in public, rather than focusing on the problems caused by real crime in Glasgow. 

“This is not a case about harassment, intimidation or violent protest – this is simply a grandmother, who held a sign offering to speak to anyone who would like to engage.” 

The law’s architect, Gillian Mackay MSP, admitted on BBC Scotland earlier this year that the vague prohibitions in the buffer zones law could criminalise someone for praying visibly from a window in their home within the zone, “depending on who’s passing by the window.” 

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance highlighted this law as a particular matter for concern in his Munich Security Conference speech in February of this year. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Brussels authorities face legal challenge after arresting individuals expressing concerns about puberty blockers 

  • Demand letter issued to Belgian Police following arrest of campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Canada) and Lois McLatchie Miller (UK)
  • Pair were arrested for holding conversations in public space about gender ideology: “children cannot consent to puberty blockers”

BRUSSELS (9 December 2025) – A UK citizen and Canadian campaigner are seeking compensation after they were arrested by Brussels authorities for peacefully expressing views about the harmful effects of puberty blockers on children. 

On 5 June 2025, Belgian police detained Chris Elston (known online as “Billboard Chris”) and ADF International’s Lois McLatchie Miller while they were conducting man-on-the-street interviews about gender ideology and the harmful effects of puberty blockers on children. To prompt conversation, they held signs reading: “Children are never born in the wrong body,” and “Children cannot consent to puberty blockers”.  

“It is scandalous to expose children to puberty blockers, and it is scandalous to silence and jail those who speak out about it. No one should fear arrest for defending children's safety.”

- Lois McLatchie Miller
McLatchie Miller had initially called the police for help after being harassed repeatedly by hostile men on the street while trying to conduct interviews. An aggressive crowd formed around the pair. Upon arrival, 14 police officers decided to arrest McLatchie Miller and Elston rather than the aggressors. The pair were taken into custody, held for several hours, and had their signs confiscated and destroyed. 

Right to Free Speech Violated

Responding to the incident at the time, the U.S. State Department said: “We are aware of these reports and are looking into the matter. The State Department strongly supports the peaceful freedom of expression for all”. 

With the support of ADF International and Belgian legal counsel, Elston and McLatchie Miller have issued a formal demand letter to the Brussels Chief of Police, as well as to the ombudsman, the city, the police inspectorate, and the state.

Estás viendo un contenido de marcador de posición de YouTube. Para acceder al contenido real, haz clic en el siguiente botón. Ten en cuenta que al hacerlo compartirás datos con terceros proveedores.

Más información
Desbloquear contenido Aceptar el servicio requerido y desbloquear los contenidos
The letter asserts that the authorities’ actions violated their freedom of expression and physical integrity under Belgian and international human rights law. It requests: a thorough and impartial investigation into the incident; official acknowledgment of rights violations; appropriate compensation and steps to ensure that such actions will not recur.  “Billboard Chris and Lois McLatchie Miller were arrested while holding consensual conversations on the street about the basic truth about the dangers of gender ideology. Any society that denies the basic right to express the truth is on a path to totalitarianism.  “Whether online or on the street, it is clear that free speech has reached a crisis point in Europe. EU governments cannot claim to uphold human rights while repeatedly violating the right to free expression.  “Belgian authorities not only failed to uphold the fundamental right to speak freely, they turned the power of the state against two individuals who were peacefully exercising their rights at the behest of increasingly aggressive bystanders, said Dr  Felix Böllmann, Director of European Advocacy for ADF International.  Elston, who regularly speaks about protecting children from harmful gender ideology in public squares across Europe and North America, including by sharing his conversations on social media, has publicly stated that he intends to return to Brussels and expects authorities to safeguard his right to speak freely.  “I’m speaking in the public square about one of the most significant medical human rights scandals of our day – the deliberate damaging of children’s bodies for an ideology which teaches they were born in the wrong body.  “Children don’t need drugs or scalpels – they are perfect just as they are, and need affirmation to love the skin they’re in. My engagement is based on mountains of medical evidence that has been established across the world. A society that punishes citizens for stating truth is on a dangerous path,” Elston said.   McLatchie Miller added: “Puberty blockers, and the cross-sex hormones that so often follow them, are highly dangerous drugs that can cause long-lasting damage to children – impacting their bodily development, bone density, mental health, lifelong fertility, and more. It is scandalous to expose children to these drugs, and it is scandalous to silence and jail those who speak out about it. No one should fear arrest for defending children’s safety.” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Chris Elston, Lois McLatchie Miller

South Australia mother to take legal action after teen daughter exposed to “disturbing” sex ed content

  • Third party education provider “headspace” exposed children to pictures of “trans” bodies with double mastectomy scars in lesson about sexuality
  • Nicki Gaylard, mother of 6, is now homeschooling her children and is ready to take legal action against the Department of Education – “Let children be children”

ADELAIDE (2 December) – Mother of six, Nicki Gaylard, is “strongly considering” legal action against the Department of Education following a presentation that exposed Year 9 girls – including her daughter, aged 14 – to highly inappropriate and explicit sexual content without parental knowledge or consent.

Year 9 girls, including Nicki’s daughter Courtney, were removed from regular lessons and placed into an unsupervised presentation facilitated by external personnel. During this session, the girls report being shown sexually explicit material and hearing graphic references that left them distressed and confused.

"I'm looking to take this forward for the sake of other kids across the country who shouldn't have to go through what my daughter went through; and for all the parents who should never be sidestepped in this way."

- Nicki Gaylard

The presenters made reference to practices including bestiality, telling the girls “don’t Google it though”. The presentation also included people who have sex with siblings, with presenters using the terms “sister love” and “brother love”.

During the lesson, which emphasized themes of diversity and acceptance, images were put on the screen to show the children “trans bodies” – displaying bodies from the waist-up, where scars from double mastectomies were visible.

The school did not inform parents ahead of this session, nor did they provide any opportunity to consent or withdraw their children.

Following the incident, Nicki Gaylard withdrew her children from the school, stating that she could not risk their exposure to unsupervised and inappropriate sexual content within the school environment.

Despite having presented the content across multiple schools, third-party education provider, “headspace”, has refused to allow Nicki access to view the PowerPoint.

Nicki Gaylard said: “I am strongly considering taking this case forward because I’m seeking justice for my daughter, who was deeply affected by what she saw that day. Her childhood was shortened through exposure to completely inappropriate material that headspace won’t even let me see. How can they be happy to show to children what they are ashamed to show to adults? Let children be children.

“I’m also looking to take this forward for the sake of other kids across the country who shouldn’t have to go through what my daughter went through; and for all the parents who should never be sidestepped in this way. That is, after all, our right and our duty as parents – and school authorities should respect our authority to determine what’s appropriate for our kids.”

Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, supporting Gaylard’s case, said: “Parents send their children to school expecting an education and them to be kept safe, not exposure to explicit sexual content. Yet that basic trust was broken. No parent should be kept in the dark about what their child is being taught, and no child should be placed in an unsupervised session dealing with adult themes.”

“Sadly, Nicki’s case is an example of a larger pattern. Increasingly, parents are discovering that radical approaches to sex education – often shaped by internationally-developed curricula and promoted by activist groups at the national level – are being quietly rolled out. This case is about drawing a firm line: parental rights matter, transparency matters, and safeguarding children is not optional.”

The Department of Education has acknowledged procedural failures, confirming that parents were not notified; required vetting processes were not followed; no teacher was present; and an investigation is underway into the third-party presenter.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Photos by Giovanni Portello / ADF International

Nicki Gaylard: Australia

Mother of six, Nicki Gaylard, is considering legal action against the Department of Education following a presentation that exposed Year 9 girls – including her daughter, aged 14 – to highly inappropriate and explicit sexual content without parental knowledge or consent.

Continue reading

EU ignores free speech concerns in review of censorial Digital Services Act

  • More than 100 global free speech experts last month sent a letter to the European Commission, coordinated by ADF International, warning of global censorship under DSA
  • Now, the European Commission has failed to address censorship concerns in its formal review, published yesterday; the Commission responded to experts’ letter just days ahead of the review, denying threats to free speech

BRUSSELS (20 November 2025) – The European Commission has ignored substantive free speech concerns from experts from around the world in its first formal report on the Digital Service Act (DSA), published yesterday. 

The review, mandated by Article 91 of the DSA itself, came amidst widespread international outcry that the legislation violates freedom of expression, including from major online platforms, European civil society, the House Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, and others.  

In September, more than 50 European NGOs stressed that the broad terms of “systemic risks,” “disinformation,” and “illegal content,” coupled with the activist role of “trusted flaggers” might violate freedom of expression and information under Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Last month, over 100 free speech warned about global online censorship under the DSA, in a letter to the Commission coordinated by ADF International.   

“The Commission has missed an extremely critical opportunity to restore free speech and to engage constructively with its citizens."

- Adina Portaru, Senior Counsel, Europe, for ADF International

The free speech experts’ letter called on the Commission to address these free speech concerns in its review of the DSA, which was published yesterday, but the Commission has now failed to do so in its report.  

Instead, the report reiterates the Commission’s position that the DSA is “content-agnostic” and therefore beyond free-speech scrutiny. This stance is at odds with the DSA’s real-world enforcement, which pressures platforms to remove content to avoid punishment from the EU, which can result in fines of up to 6% of global revenue. The report provides no substantive response to the concerns around censorship-by-proxy, overreach, or the DSA’s extraterritorial effects, nor does it assess the DSA under the EU Charter’s free speech protections, as requested by experts and NGOs. 

More alarmingly, the Commission further signals its intention to deepen and tighten DSA-related coordination, calling for stronger inter-authority cooperation, joint guidance, and even potential “one-stop-shop” mechanisms across the EU, a development that risks amplifying existing free-speech concerns rather than addressing them. 

Reacting to the DSA review, Senior Counsel, Europe for ADF International, Dr Adina Portaru said: “It is alarming that the European Commission has disregarded well-founded censorship concerns and overreach, expressed by international free speech experts, big tech, and concerned governments alike in its review of the DSA. The Commission has indicated that they will address free speech in future reviews ( in 2027); however, the threat of censorship should not be taken lightly and addressing its effects cannot be delayed. 

“The DSA could install a global censorship regime and is the greatest threat to online freedom of expression in the Western world today. We will continue to advocate for the protection of free speech in light of the DSA’s censorial threat in order to keep the digital public square free.”  

Free speech concerns from US government and big tech companies  

The Commission’s report fails to address transatlantic free-speech concerns, despite growing tension around the DSA’s global effects. 

In September, US Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder expressed concern that the DSA risks censoring American citizens. This followed an August directive from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to US diplomats in Europe to prioritize diplomatic efforts to challenge the DSA. 

X and Google have issued similar warnings about the potentially global censorship impact of the DSA. 

Ambassador Puzder also said: “No President of either party, and I can tell you President Trump in particular, is going to tolerate a foreign government restricting the First Amendment fundamental free speech, free expression rights of American citizens, to an extent that the United States government can’t even regulate those rights.  

“So we need to come to an understanding as to what’s happening with the Digital Services Act.” 

Ambassador Puzder also reportedly said the United States would make formal submissions under the European Commission’s review of the DSA.  

Free speech experts’ letter to European Commission 

Last month, 113 experts, including a former VP of Yahoo Europe, a former US Senator, and politicians, academics, lawyers and journalists from around the globe, wrote to the Commission, calling on it to consult free speech experts as part of its review into the DSA. 

The letter, which was coordinated by ADF International, said: “[The DSA] constructs a pan-European censorship infrastructure with loosely defined boundaries and the potential to suppress legitimate democratic discourse… 

“The wide definition of illegal content allows the most speech-restrictive provisions of one single EU country to be imposed as a standard across the entire Union, and potentially worldwide, effectively importing the lowest common denominator of expression.” 

The letter added: “The broad definition of ‘illegal content’ in the DSA, combined with existing jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) opens the door to worldwide takedowns.” 

The letter expressed concern over the European Commission’s opaque review process into the DSA and called on the Commission to: “Conduct a comprehensive and inclusive consultation with independent experts in freedom of expression, constitutional law, and digital rights, ahead of the November review, inviting public comments. 

“Publicly disclose the list of NGOs, civil society actors, and partner entities engaged in the review process, including the criteria and methodology used for their selection. 

“Ensure that the review includes a rigorous legal analysis of the DSA’s compatibility with fundamental rights protections, especially under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, Article 10 of the ECHR, and Article 19 of the ICCPR.”  

In the Commission’s response to the letter, it stated that, “the DSA does not regulate specific speech as it is content agnostic” and that “competent authorities…have no power to moderate user content or to impose any specific content moderation approach on online platforms.”  

“Claiming that the Commission is ‘not moderating’ because it does not press the delete button itself is disingenuous. Platforms respond to Commission pressure, and the Commission is fully aware of the practical consequences of the extraordinary amount of pressure it exerts. The response letter to the free speech experts’ concerns never addresses this indirect but powerful influence. 

“The Commission’s response simply ignores that its own enforcement actions are based not on agnostic principles but on contested normative determinations about which speech categories create systemic risks. In effect: the DSA cannot be content-agnostic when its entire enforcement architecture revolves around evaluating how platforms treat specific content types, even if the law avoids explicitly naming them,” responded Dr Portaru. 

“Further, the Commission has entirely dismissed the very valid concerns of extraterritorial reach despite the clear global threat of the DSA. The response fails to address repeated concerns from international partners, including the U.S., that the DSA incentivises de facto global moderation policies. The Commission has missed an extremely critical opportunity to restore free speech and to engage constructively with its citizens on the DSA’s impact on fundamental rights,” Portaru continued. Read the free speech experts’ letter and see the full list of signatories here.    

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Adina Portaru

Somalia (52th Session)

This report outlines concerns regarding the protection of freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression in Somalia. In particular, it highlights laws prohibiting the peaceful propagation of minority religions, the criminalization of offenses to religion, and the vulnerability of Christians, particularly converts, who face discrimination and violence at the hands of militant groups as well as communities.

Continue reading

Singapore (52th Session)

This submission outlines concerns regarding Singapore’s restrictions on freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression. These concerns stem from specific legal frameworks, including the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act, Societies Act, Penal Code, Undesirable Publications Act, and Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA). In ADF International’s analysis, several provisions within these laws are inconsistent with Singapore’s human rights obligations.

Continue reading