US Government agency condemns UK silent prayer arrest 

  • In its latest report, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) highlights that the European governments have “targeted individuals for their peaceful religious expression”  
  • Arrest of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce for silently praying in an abortion “buffer zone” listed as primary example  
  • UK Home Office to release guidance on “buffer zone” policing imminently – abortion advocates lobby for silent prayer to be punished 

LONDON (14th May 2024) – A U.S. federal government commission has called out the unjust arrest of a silently praying Christian in Birmingham, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, in its annual international report. 

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) was established as part of the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA), which mandates that U.S. policy includes condemning violations of religious freedom abroad and assisting foreign governments to protect this fundamental human right. Commissioners are appointed by the President and the leadership of both political parties in the Senate and the House of Representatives. 

The 2024 annual report highlighted the high-profile arrest of Vaughan-Spruce as an example of European governments “targeting individuals for their peaceful religious expression”.  

Responding to the news, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce said: 

“Arresting individuals for silent prayer has put Britain in a position of global embarrassment. Nobody should be criminalised for their mere thoughts – this is a basic principle of a liberal democracy. If we can’t get that right at home, how are we meant to uphold human rights on the world stage? 

I was searched, arrested, put in a police van, charged and placed on trial for a “thoughtcrime” – for peacefully and imperceptibly praying outside an abortion facility. With support from ADF UK, I was fully vindicated in court – but my case isn’t a one-off. The Home Office can prevent my arrest from recurring by clarifying in their upcoming guidance that, while we all condemn harassment, freedom of thought and consensual conversation must remain free.” 

"Arresting individuals for silent prayer has put Britain in a position of global embarrassment. Nobody should be criminalised for their mere thoughts – this is a basic principle of a liberal democracy."

- Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, arrested, tried and fully acquitted after praying silently in her head in an abortion "buffer zone"

Arrested for a “Thoughtcrime”

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested twice in 2023 for silently praying in a “buffer zone” in Birmingham. A Public Spaces Protection Order had been installed by local authorities to ban all expressions of “approval or disapproval” of abortion on the streets near an abortion facility. In what is widely thought to be the first “thoughtcrime” case in 21st Century Britain, Vaughan-Spruce was charged even though she had prayed imperceptibly and not expressed any opinion outside of her own mind. 

A Catholic priest, Father Sean Gough, was also charged for holding a sign within a buffer zone reading “praying for free speech”. Both were tried at Birmingham Magistrates Court and fully acquitted of all charges with legal support from ADF UK, after the prosecution were able to offer “no evidence”. 

Two further individuals – Adam Smith-Connor and Livia Tossici-Bolt – will face trial later this year after both being charged with breaching “buffer zones” on separate occasions in Bournemouth.  

Adam Smith-Connor, like Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, prayed silently in his head. Livia Tossici-Bolt, a long-term crisis pregnancy support volunteer, held a sign reading “Here to talk, if you want”. 

Watch Isabel’s second arrest, sparking the condemnation of the US Commission, below:

YouTube

By loading the video, you agree to YouTube's privacy policy.
Learn more

Load video

Home Office guidance expected to be published imminently

Draft guidance issued by the Home Office in December clarified that national “buffer zones” would not prohibit silent prayer, nor consensual conversations between adults within the zone. International law requires the UK government to protect freedom of thought as an absolute right. The right to engage freely and consensually in conversations is protected by the fundamental right to freedom of speech.  Labour’s Rupa Huq and Conservative Sir Bernard Jenkin reportedly met with the Home Office recently to demand a stronger crackdown on silent prayer occurring within 150m of abortion facilities.   Yet several other members of parliament have spoken up for maintaining protections on silent prayer and consensual conversation in the guidance.  

Yet several other members of parliament have spoken up for maintaining protections on silent prayer and consensual conversation in the guidance.  

Andrew Lewer MP said: 

“The Home Office guidance on buffer zones should at least protect these in order to uphold international standards on freedom of speech and of thought.  

 “While police crack down on these peaceful activities, they expose a double standard where protesters on different ideological issues are allowed much wider scope to express their beliefs.” 

READ FURTHER REFLECTIONS FROM CROSS-PARTY MPS HERE 

The final guidance is expected to be published imminently. 

Speaking about the “thoughtcrime” trials seen in Britain, Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK said: 

“The principle of freedom of thought and speech must be defended both within and outside ‘buffer zones’. To his credit, the Home Secretary has, thus far, sought to keep our country in line with international law by underlining the importance of protecting freedom of thought as an absolute right, and protecting the right to freely engage in consensual conversations, which is the lifeblood of any genuinely thriving democracy.  

That said, it is crucially important that he holds firm in the face of concerted pressure from a vocal minority of backbench MPs who, unsatisfied with introducing arguably the most censorial legislation in modern British history, are now seeking to criminalise the innermost thoughts of law abiding citizens and even consensual discussions. These efforts of a handful of Labour and Conservative backbenchers are nothing short of Orwellian and are undoubtedly the first step to the normalization of state-endorsed content-based censorship,” commented Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK. 

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

MPs call on Home Office to allow consensual conversation and silent prayer in “buffer zones” after woman charged for “offering to talk”  

  • Five cross-party politicians, Sir Edward Leigh, Andrew Lewer, Carla Lockhart, Andrew Bridgen, and Lord Jackson, call out censorship of retired medical scientist 
  • MPs highlight “double standards” when it comes to free speech in the UK 
  • Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt will face trial for peacefully holding a sign within an abortion “buffer zone”; ADF UK is supporting her legal defence 

LONDON (28th March 2024) – MPs have called on the Home Office to protect consensual conversation and silent prayer in “buffer zones” after a woman was charged for holding a sign. 

Four MPs and one peer also said the crackdown on what one MP called the “entirely benign behaviour” of Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt, 62, a Christian woman and retired medical scientist, showed a double standard in law enforcement.  

Dr Tossici-Bolt, whose legal defence is being supported by ADF UK, is facing trial for holding a sign that read: “Here to talk, if you want,” in a “buffer zone” around an abortion facility in Bournemouth.  

Reacting to Dr Tossici-Bolt’s case, senior Tory MP and former minister Sir Edward Leigh said: 

 “Freedom of thought and freedom of speech are the bedrock of a free society.  

“It’s mad that a retiree is facing trial for inviting people to have a harmless chat. No one should be turned into a criminal just for peacefully offering to talk to people in a public space. 

“All our warnings about the effect buffer zones would have on free speech have come true. We’ve seen a woman arrested twice for thinking and a Catholic priest charged and prosecuted. Both won in the courts but only after a long and needless legal battle that will have a chilling effect on free speech.” 

"It’s mad that a retiree is facing trial for inviting people to have a harmless chat. No one should be turned into a criminal just for peacefully offering to talk to people in a public space."

- Sir Edward Leigh, MP

Under a public spaces protection order (PSPO), a censorial buffer zone was put in place by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) council around an abortion facility.  

The PSPO prohibits specific named activities, such as “engaging in an act of approval/disapproval or attempted act of approval/disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services”, including through “prayer” and “counselling”.  

A double standard on free speech 

Politicians have also called out double standards in the authorities’ approach to free speech and thought.  

Democratic Unionist Party MP Carla Lockhart commented: 

“Our law enforcement, who already have limited resources, must focus on real crimes instead of entirely benign behaviour, as in this case.  

 “One cannot help but notice an alarming double standard—very objectionable views are often allowed at pro-Palestinian protests in the name of freedom of speech and expression, but the same right is not extended to this Christian woman who did not even offer an opinion, but merely invited a conversation.  

“Why does one rule apply to those protestors, and another to Livia?” 

Conservative peer Lord Jackson said:  

“It’s astonishing that people of faith offering silent prayers on a matter of conscience are stigmatised, harassed and criminalised whilst those screaming for jihad on hate marches are allowed to spread their poison with impunity.  

“An obvious example of dual policing. All under a Conservative Government. Disgraceful and embarrassing.” 

Independent MP Andrew Bridgen said:  

“There should not be double standards when it comes to free speech. Yet, repeatedly, we see evidence that Christian expression is harshly censored, while the right to voice more fashionable views is protected.” 

PSPOs have been widely criticised by free speech campaigners, as well as politicians, for their censorious effects on free speech, thought, and religious liberty. Defenders of “buffer zones” often say they are intended to prevent harassment—but harassment is already a crime, making the existence of “buffer zones” unnecessary and malign.  

“Buffer zones” are to be rolled out around abortion centres across the country as part of the Public Order Act 2023. Draft Home Office guidance clarified that silent prayer and consensual conversation would be protected in “buffer zones”, but two MPs—one Conservative and one Labour—have pushed for even these to be censored. 

Home Office guidance must uphold free speech 

The final Home Office guidance on “buffer zones” is expected soon, and MPs have said Dr Tossici-Bolt’s case shows the importance of the guidance protecting these basic freedoms.  

Sir Edward said: “Livia’s case shows how important it is for the draft guidance on the Public Order Bill to protect consensual conversations and silent prayer in ‘buffer zones’.  

“The Home Secretary must ensure these common sense protections are kept or we’ll see more people like Livia unjustly turned into criminals by bad law.” 

Conservative MP Andrew Lewer said: 

“Cases like Livia’s highlight the threat to free expression and belief inherent in censorial ‘buffer zones’. Christianity is not criminal. Neither offering charitable help, engaging in consensual conversation, nor praying silently, should ever be illegal in the UK.  

“The Home Office guidance on buffer zones should at least protect these in order to uphold international standards on freedom of speech and of thought. 

 “While police crack down on these peaceful activities, they expose a double standard where protesters on different ideological issues are allowed much wider scope to express their beliefs.” 

Bridgen said: 

“Livia should not be criminalised for offering to talk. Her case demonstrates that final Home Office guidance on the Public Order Bill must protect consensual conversation, along with silent prayer, in buffer zones.”  

"Neither offering charitable help, engaging in consensual conversation, nor praying silently, should ever be illegal in the UK. The Home Office guidance on buffer zones should at least protect these in order to uphold international standards on freedom of speech and of thought."

- Andrew Lewer MP

A free vote? 

Bridgen added that the vote for “buffer zones” in the Public Order Act should have never passed in the first place, as since it was concerned with public order and free speech, it should have been whipped.  

He questioned what role the Leader of the House Penny Mordaunt played in that vote not being whipped, and criticised her vote in favour of “buffer zones”. 

“In fact, as a matter of public order and civil liberties, the vote on enforcing buffer zones across the country should have been whipped in favour of free speech. Why was this not the case?,” Bridgen said.  

He added: “As Leader of the House, Penny Mordaunt works closely with the Chief Whip. She was in this role at the time of the buffer zone vote. She voted for censorious buffer zones and must answer the question of what role she played in that vote being a free vote. 

“The public deserves to know the answer to this, especially in light of discussion about her possibly being the next Tory leader.  

“No potential leader of the Conservative Party should support viewpoint censorship.” 

UK has always valued free speech 

Lockhart commented:  

“Livia’s case underlines the urgent need for the Home Secretary’s guidance on buffer zones to safeguard consensual conversations.  

“It must also safeguard silent prayer—other cases, such as that of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce who was arrested, interrogated, charged, and prosecuted before eventually being vindicated for her thoughts, show the dystopian consequences of criminalising this. 

“No one should want to live in a society where the state has the power to say what you can or can’t think, or what peaceful interactions you can or can’t have with others.   

She added: 

 “The UK has always been a country that values freedom to hold, express and discuss a wide range of opinions and deeply held beliefs. We need to ensure those freedoms are not restricted by postcode, and not policed out of the public sphere by prejudiced policing.” 

A censorious trend 

Dr Tossici-Bolt’s case is the latest of several, which show the censorious and dystopian effects of “buffer zones”.  

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested twice for silently praying in a buffer zone, a Catholic priest, Father Sean Gough, was charged for the same act, and Adam Smith-Connor is also facing trial for silent prayer.  

Vaughan-Spruce and Father Sean, whose cases were supported by ADF UK, were vindicated through the courts and all charges against them have been dropped. Smith-Connor’s case is ongoing, and his trial will be in September. His case is also supported by ADF UK. 

“Under vaguely-written local “buffer zone” measures, we have seen volunteers like Livia criminalised simply for offering help to women in need; and others dragged through courts for praying, even silently, in their minds.   

“The principle of freedom of thought and speech must be defended both within and outside ‘buffer zones’. The Home Office have sought to keep our country in line with international law by protecting freedom of thought and of consensual conversation in the draft buffer zone guidance. It is vital, for the preservation of democracy, that this stands,” commented Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK. 

.

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

Pictured: Jeremiah Igunnubole (ADF UK); Livia Tossici-Bolt

VIDEO: Scottish buffer zones bill is “patronising” and unhelpful, woman who recieved help from pro-life volunteers tells parliament 

  •  Alina Dulgheriu, who accepted an offer of support to continue her pregnancy from a pro-life volunteer near an abortion facility, asks Scottish parliament to protect the right to offer help to women in crisis 
  • Scottish proposal would ban prayer and pro-life speech even inside houses within 150m or more of abortion facilities 

EDINBURGH (12 March 2024) – Alina Dulgheriu, a mother who recieved help at her point of critical need outside an abortion facility, has asked the Scottish government to consider vulnerable women before censoring pro-life help in Scotland. 

Dulgheriu credits pro-life volunteers with empowering her to make her wanted choice to continue her pregnancy despite financial and social pressures placed on her to abort. 

She has since established the “Be Here For Me” campaign, collecting testimonies of other women who have been positively impacted by the presence and services offered by charitable pro-life volunteers. Dulghieriu called on the Scottish government to allow volunteers to continue the work that she views as “much needed” in order to support vulnerable women. 

“I didn’t want an abortion but I was abandoned by my partner, my friends and society. My financial situation at the time would have made raising a child very challenging. Thanks to the help I was offered by a group outside of a clinic before my appointment, my daughter is here today. Stopping people from offering much-needed services and resources for women in my situation is wrong. Let them help,” Alina Dulgheriu, spokesperson for Be Here For Me, commented on the implementation of censorial “buffer zones”. 

"Removing the option to receive help to keep a child...is deeply patronising and assumes that women can't make a decision for ourselves, or that we might choose the wrong option."

- Alina Dulgheriu, spokesperson for Be Here for Me, a group of mothers campaigning against buffer zone censorship

Addressing parliamentarians on the Health, Social Care and Sport committee, Dulgheriu explained that the buffer zones bill would be “deeply patronising” to women by denying them an opportunity to hear and consider options to continue their pregnancy with charitable support.  

“It is worrying that we will consider denying vulnerable woman access to potential life-changing, life changing information – especially when facing one of the most challenging decision of their lives that could have lasting ramification on their mental and physical health.  

Removing the option to receive help to keep a child in case we feel offended is deeply patronising and assumes that woman can’t make a decision for ourselves or that we might choose the wrong option.

My case is not a one-off. There are many hundreds of women just like me who have benefitted from this support. Yet we are all too often ignored.” 

In a Q&A with Members of the Scottish Parliament, Dulgheriu went on to explain that the help she had recieved from pro-life volunteers had not been offered by the abortion provider whom she had asked about her options.

Promote “tolerance, not censorship”, asks woman arrested for silent prayer 

The charitable volunteer who was arrested for praying silently in a controversial “buffer zones” case in Birmingham will also testified to Holyrood about her experience of being prosecuted for a “thoughtcrime”. 

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was seen being arrested on a viral video last winter when she said she “might be praying inside [her] head”. She was charged with “engaging in an act that is intimidating to service users” within the buffer zone of an abortion clinic – despite the clinic having been closed.   

She was later fully acquitted at Birmingham Magistrates Court after the prosecution could offer no evidence as to her thoughts. 

Addressing the parliamentarians, Vaughan-Spruce said:

“After having to clear my name in court I was rearrested two weeks later being told ‘my prayers were an offence’. I’m concerned that this will end up happening in Scotland. Nobody should be punished for a “thoughtcrime” – yet this proposed legislation could easily allow that to happen.

The buffer zone has created a huge amount of division in our area, and many locals tell me that they are now fearful to share their beliefs with their neighbours. The community has become polarised and the buffer zone has fostered intolerance. 

“I wholly recommend that the Scottish government protect freedom of thought and of speech in Scotland, and promote tolerance rather than censorship.”

"I wholly recommend that the Scottish government protect freedom of thought and of speech in Scotland, and promote tolerance rather than censorship."

- Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was criminally charged for breaking a "buffer zone" regulation after she prayed silently in her mind near an abortion facility in Birmingham. Isabel was tried and found innocent. ADF UK supported her legal defence.

The bill has recieved criticism from free speech advocates, who raise concern that the vague and ambiguous language of the text could crack down on peaceful conversation and even thought. 

“Scotland’s buffer zone bill is one of the most extensive crackdowns on pro-life thought and speech we’ve seen. As drafted, it could even ban prayer and peaceful pro-life speech within homes if they are situated sufficiently near an abortion facility. The proposal would also allow the 150m distance of the buffer zone to be expanded by local authorities to an unlimited extent. It is vital that the parliament take heed of the stories of Alina and Isabel, and uphold their duty to protect freedom of thought, offers of help, and consensual conversation,” said Lois McLatchie Miller, spokesperson for ADF UK in Scotland. 

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

PICTURED: Isabel Vaughan-Spruce; Alina Dulgeheriu; Lois McLatchie Miller, ADF UK

Vindicated charity volunteer arrested for silent prayer in an abortion “buffer zone” testifies to Scottish Parliament 

  •  Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was arrested for praying silently in a viral video, asks Scottish parliament to protect freedom of thought in “buffer zones” bill 
  • Scottish proposal could ban prayer and pro-life conversations even inside houses within 150m or more of abortion facilities
  • Mother helped by pro-life volunteers also to testify to parliament against censorial “buffer zones” today

EDINBURGH (12 March 2024) – The charitable volunteer who was arrested for praying silently in a controversial “buffer zones” case in Birmingham will today testify to Holyrood about her experience of being prosecuted for a “thoughtcrime”. 

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was seen being arrested on a viral video last winter when she said she “might be praying inside [her] head”. She was charged with “engaging in an act that is intimidating to service users” within the buffer zone of an abortion clinic – despite the clinic having been closed.   

She was later fully acquitted at Birmingham Magistrates Court after the prosecution could offer no evidence as to her thoughts. 

YouTube

By loading the video, you agree to YouTube's privacy policy.
Learn more

Load video

"After having to clear my name in court, I was rearrested two weeks later being told ‘my prayers were an offence’.. I’m concerned that this will end up happening in Scotland. Nobody should be punished for a “thoughtcrime” - yet this proposed legislation could easily allow that to happen."

- Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, whose legal defence was supported by ADF UK

Vaughan-Spruce is expected to address the parliamentary Committee on Health, Social Care and Sports with the following remarks: 

“Since the implementation of the buffer zone in Birmingham, I have been arrested simply for standing silently near the closed abortion centre – the justification being that this was intimidating service users (I remind you it was closed, there were no service users). After having to clear my name in court I was rearrested two weeks later being told ‘my prayers were an offence’. I’m concerned that this will end up happening in Scotland. Nobody should be punished for a “thoughtcrime” – yet this proposed legislation could easily allow that to happen. 

We are all against harassment. We already have laws to prohibit that and all pro-life leaders would willingly work with any authority to condemn harassment.  

 But buffer zones go much further than only banning harassment – and instead criminalise helpful charity work or even prayer. The buffer zone has created a huge amount of division in our area, and many locals tell me that they are now fearful to share their beliefs with their neighbours. The community has become polarised and the buffer zone has fostered intolerance. I wholly recommend that the Scottish government protect freedom of thought and of speech in Scotland, and promote tolerance rather than censorship.” 

The architect of the “buffer zones” bill, Gillian McKay MSP of the Green Party, will also be a member of the parliamentary committee scrutinizing the bill and hearing testimonies from those impacted by it.  

The bill has recieved criticism from free speech advocates, who raise concern that the vague and ambiguous language of the text could crack down on peaceful conversation and even thought.

“Scotland’s buffer zone bill is one of the most extensive crackdowns on pro-life thought and speech we’ve seen. As drafted, it could even ban prayer and peaceful pro-life speech within homes if they are situated sufficiently near an abortion facility. The proposal would also allow the 150m distance of the buffer zone to be expanded by local authorities to an unlimited extent. It is vital that the parliament take heed of the stories of Alina and Isabel, and uphold their duty to protect freedom of thought, offers of help, and consensual conversation,” said Lois McLatchie Miller, spokesperson for ADF UK in Scotland.

Mother helped by pro-life volunteers also to testify against censorial “buffer zones”

Also giving testimony to the committee today is Alina Dulgheriu, a mother who recieved help at her point of critical need outside an abortion facility in Ealing, London. 

Dulgheriu credits pro-life volunteers with empowering her to make her wanted choice to continue her pregnancy despite financial and social pressures placed on her to abort. 

Hear Alina’s story >>

 

YouTube

By loading the video, you agree to YouTube's privacy policy.
Learn more

Load video

Dulgheriu has since established the “Be Here For Me” campaign, collecting testimonies of other women who have been positively impacted by the presence and services offered by charitable pro-life volunteers. Dulghieriu will call on the Scottish government to allow volunteers to continue the work that she views as “life-saving”. 

“I didn’t want an abortion but I was abandoned by my partner, my friends and society. My financial situation at the time would have made raising a child very challenging. Thanks to the help I was offered by a group outside of a clinic before my appointment, my daughter is here today. Stopping people from offering much-needed services and resources for women in my situation is wrong. Let them help,” Alina Dulgheriu, spokesperson for Be Here For Me, commented on the implementation of censorial “buffer zones”. 

"Thanks to the help I was offered by a group outside of a clinic before my appointment, my daughter is here today. Stopping people from offering much-needed services and resources for women in my situation is wrong. Let them help."

- Alina Dulgheriu, who benefitted from help offered by pro-life volunteers, will also testify to the parliament today

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

Pictured: Isabel Vaughan-Spruce; Alina Dulgheriu

Two MPs push for further crackdown on silent prayer despite outcry over “thought crime” arrests

  • MPs have approached the Home Office demanding a change to draft guidance on “buffer zones” to censor silent thoughts within 150m of abortion facilities 
  • Politicians ignore public outcry over incidents of arrests for silent prayer in the past year; ADF UK have supported the legal defence of 3  individuals charged over “thoughtcrime” 

LONDON (3 February 2024) – Labour’s Rupa Huq and Conservative Sir Bernard Jenkin reportedly met with the Home Office this week to demand a stronger crackdown on silent prayer occurring within 150m of abortion facilities.

Parliament voted to introduce “buffer zones” as part of the Public Order Act 2023, with vague legislation which would prohibit all forms of “influencing” within a large area of public space near the abortion facility.

The draft guidance issued by the Home Office clarified that the prohibition would not concern silent prayer, nor consensual conversations between adults within the zone. International law requires the UK government to protect freedom of thought as an absolute right. The right to engage freely and consensually in conversations is protected by the fundamental right to freedom of speech.

“The relentless efforts of MPs to further target silent prayer expose the falsity that this campaign is about preventing harassment. We all agree that harassment is wrong, it has always been unlawful and the police have indicated they have the tools to deal with it. In demanding changes to the guidance to ensure it captures prayer, these MPs have unwittingly exposed the reality of who they were seeking to target in the first place,” said Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF UK.

Public Outrage at arrests for silent prayer

The guidance follows various incidents within the past year where, under existing laws, local authorities have introduced local “buffer zones”, and individuals have been arrested merely for praying silently in their minds.

Last year, a video of charitable volunteer Isabel Vaughan-Spruce caused public outrage after she was arrested for saying that she “might be praying inside [her] head.” The footage was viewed over 15 million times on X (formerly Twitter).


Vaughan-Spruce was charged for her thoughtcrime but fully vindicated at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court, who found her “not guilty”. Under the ambiguous language of the Public Order Act, Isabel could potentially face criminal penalties on the basis of the thoughts in her mind in future.

Mounting concerns over UK “thought policing”

“I’ve been arrested twice and fully vindicated by a court verdict that upheld my freedom of thought, and yet even still, officers can continue to interrogate me for the simple act of thinking prayerful thoughts on a public street. This isn’t 1984, but 2023. No matter one’s beliefs on abortion, nobody should be punished merely for the prayers they hold inside their head.

Ahead of the new ‘buffer zones’ law being implemented, there is an urgent need for clarity as to everybody’s right to freedom of thought, as is protected in international human rights law. The Home Office’s draft guidance at least affirms that nobody should be criminalised on the basis of their thoughts alone. This is obvious common-sense protection for basic rights that must be upheld,” said Isabel Vaughan-Spruce.

On a different occasion, a Catholic Priest was arrested and charged for holding a sign within a buffer zone reading “praying for free speech”. With support from ADF UK, Father Sean Gough was found “not guilty”.

In a third instance in November 2022, a father of two and army veteran, Adam Smith-Connor, was criminally charged for praying about his own experience of abortion in a “buffer zone”. Over a year from when Adam committed his “thought crime”, he still awaits his trial. ADF UK is supporting his legal defense.

“Over the past 18 months, ADF UK hasresponded to an unprecedented need to support members of the British public facing criminal penalties or trials based merely on the thoughts that they held in their head. The UK must abide by its human rights obligations, under which nobody should be criminalised for their thoughts. It’s vital that we maintain this most basic standard of a liberal democracy. Once we allow for thought to be policed on one issue area, the precedent has been set for these abuses to proliferate.

Nobody should ever face harassment or aggression outside an abortion facility. But the law must protect the rights of those who are there to peacefully live out their convictions through offers of help or even silent prayer. It’s imperative that the Home Office respect these basic principles when finalizing its guidance,” said Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK, the organisation which supported Vaughan-Spruce’s legal defence.

Scotland looks to imprison parents for refusing to “transition” their children

  • ADF UK reacts to government proposals that could jail parents for up to seven years for refusing to “transition” their child
  • Christian leaders raise concerns new law could censor even pastoral support

EDINBURGH (11 January 2023) – Scots could soon find themselves facing jail time if found to be attempting to “change or suppress” another person’s “gender identity,” including in a family setting. 

In a vague and wide-reaching attempt to ban so-called “conversion therapy,” parents who are deemed “controlling” or considered to have “pressured” their child to “act in a particular way” when it comes to “gender identity” could be committing a crime. Criminal penalties could result if the actions cause “fear, alarm, and distress”. 

The legislative proposals, published this week for public consultation, give the example of “preventing someone from dressing in a way that reflects their sexual orientation or gender identity” as an action that could become illegal if repeated on two or more occasions. The threshold for criminality could still be met regardless of whether a parent believed they were acting in their child’s best interests.  

Penalties for such a crime include imprisonment for up to seven years, an unlimited fine, or both. 

Though LGBT-identifying people are already protected from verbal and physical abuse by existing law, the new proposals seek to criminalise a much broader set of actions – including what may be intended as a thoughtful challenge or loving advice, should this behaviour occur more than once and be deemed “coercive” (seeking to change a person’s mind regarding “gender identity”). 

Explaining their rationale, the government proposals state: “…the evidence from those with lived experience tells us that the most common form of conversion practices in Scotland is that of a series of “informal” actions conducted over a period of time.” 

Severe threat to religious freedom 

Church leaders across denominations in Scotland have raised concerns that the vague and ambiguous wording of the proposed new law could also punish Christians who offer mainstream pastoral care, advice, or opinion in good faith. The law, if passed, could violate the basic human rights to religious freedom and free speech, in addition to the rights of parents. 

To prevent instances that cause subjective “harm” but do not meet the threshold of criminality, the government additionally would create a new “civil protection order”. The order could grant courts sweeping powers to curtail the free speech of individuals. 

Lois McLatchie Miller, ADF UK spokesperson for Scotland, reacted to the proposals: 

“Common-sense parenting is not a crime. Under these draconian proposals, the Scottish government would place parents under a terrifying and well-founded fear of losing their children or being locked up in prison for saying something contrary to the favoured ideology of the day. The proposed law would violate fundamental human rights, starting with the right and duty of parents to protect their children, in addition to religious freedom and free speech rights, including for those in a position to give pastoral support. 

Children are not adults, and parents are not children. The vast majority of parents are committed to doing the sometimes difficult job of raising their children well. They deserve support and protection, not suspicion. Many hold firm, science-based beliefs in the immutability of biological sex. They have concerns grounded in the real-life testimonies of those who felt pushed into life-altering decisions that proved to be no solution. Parents must be supported to raise their children; not criminalised for protecting them.”