ADF International has been working tirelessly to make this happen.
Imagine a Europe where quoting the Bible lands you in court. Where praying silently or offering consensual conversation on a public streetside lands you with a criminal charge and hefty fines.
This isn’t dystopian fiction. It’s the reality of what’s happening right now in modern day Europe.
For years, we’ve been sounding the alarm on this creeping censorship, defending freedom of speech and standing up for those being punished for peacefully living out their beliefs.
Now, the world is taking notice.
At the Munich Security Conference earlier this year — an influential forum on international policy and global security — U.S. Vice President JD Vance warned that free expression in Europe is under siege.
Some European officials brushed off his concerns.
But just months later, The Economist — a leading voice in international journalism — dedicated its May 2025 issue to exactly that: Europe’s free speech problem.
One headline said it plainly: “JD Vance was right.”
The magazine reported: “European countries all claim to protect free speech… But in practice, it’s now being punished — not just for inciting violence, but for causing offence.”
Another piece noted: “Europe really does have a problem with free speech…All European countries guarantee [it]. However, most also try to limit the harms they fear it may cause.
“This goes well beyond the kinds of speech that even classical liberals agree should be banned…It often extends to speech that hurts people’s feelings.”
The fact that mainstream media and global leaders are finally catching up marks a powerful shift.
Silence as a Criminal Offence: The UK Cases That Sparked Outrage
At the Munich Security Conference, Vance stated that “basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular”, are at risk.
He drew attention to specific examples, including that of our client, Adam Smith-Connor, a British army veteran who was criminally convicted for silently praying across the street from an abortion facility in Bournemouth.
Adam stood still, spoke to no one, and caused no disruption, but he was still prosecuted under a so-called “buffer zone” regulation. As a result of his conviction, he was ordered to pay £9,000 in prosecution costs.
With our legal support, Adam is appealing his conviction, with the hearing scheduled for July 28th of this year.
Another case is that of our client, Livia Tossici-Bolt, also from Bournemouth. Livia was criminally charged and ordered to pay £20,000 in prosecution costs for holding a sign peacefully offering conversations near an abortion facility.
Her sign read: “Here to talk, if you want.”
Livia is exploring all appeal avenues, with our legal team standing firmly by her side.
And there are more. In Birmingham, our client Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested not once, but twice, again, for the “offence” of silent prayer within a “buffer zone”. Isabel stood silently near an abortion facility, praying in her mind.
On both occasions, she was ultimately acquitted, but the message was clear: private thoughts can now be treated as criminal acts.
In Scotland, we’re coordinating the legal defence of Rose Docherty, who was arrested for standing near a hospital with a simple pro-life sign stating, “Coercion is a crime. Here to talk if you want.”
Rose acted peacefully and in accordance with her conscience, yet she now faces legal proceedings.
These are not isolated incidents. They represent a growing culture of legal intolerance toward peaceful dissent.
Päivi Räsänen: A Global Test for Free Speech
Europe’s free speech problem isn’t just happening on public streets. It’s also happening online.
In another article entitled “Europeans are becoming less free to say what they think”, The Economist spotlighted our client, Päivi Räsänen, a former Finnish MP and grandmother criminally charged with “hate speech”.
Päivi’s so-called “crime” was peacefully sharing a Bible verse on Twitter, questioning her church’s sponsorship of a Pride parade.
For that, she endured hours of police interrogations and has been prosecuted under criminal law for six years. With our legal support, serving on her legal team, Päivi was acquitted twice, but the state prosecution has relentlessly pursued a guilty verdict.
Her case is currently pending before Finland’s Supreme Court, where she awaits a judgment with far-reaching implications not only for herself, but also for freedom of speech in Europe.
As the magazine rightly pointed out, “hate speech” laws in Europe are dangerously vague, and frequently abused to target lawful, peaceful expression.
Europe’s Expanding Censorship Regime: The Digital Services Act
Enter the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) — a sweeping online speech regulation framework.
Promoted to combat “disinformation” and ensure “safe online spaces,” the DSA grants unprecedented power to the EU by forcing online platforms to police, censor, and suppress lawful speech.
Under the DSA, online platforms face steep penalties if they fail to remove vaguely defined “illegal content.”; the EU Commission has given itself the authority to direct takedowns of speech across borders; and dissenting voices risk being drowned out by algorithmic gatekeepers.
The DSA doesn’t define “illegal,” other than to say it means anything not compliant with the law in any EU Member State, including future laws.
So, if you post something considered “insulting” in Germany, it could be deemed illegal under the DSA and taken down across all of Europe.
And although the EU claims the DSA only applies to EU member states, there’s no doubt it will set up a de facto global censorship rulebook, as platforms will be incentivized to apply the DSA standards everywhere — affecting speech across the planet.
Quite simply: The DSA is irreconcilable with the fundamental right to freedom of speech.
ADF International Is Fighting Back in Brussels and Beyond
In May this year, we co-hosted a first-of-its-kind conference at the European Parliament to address the threats to free speech posed by the DSA.
The goal was to expose this dangerous censorship framework and work with key actors to challenge the law and guarantee protections for free speech.
Members of the European Parliament, lawmakers, journalists, and concerned citizens came together for strategic discussions around the dangers of this law.
“What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act,” warned Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Virginie Joron.
Our Executive Director and free speech expert, Paul Coleman, highlighted the clear threats to free speech emanating from the DSA:
“Free speech is under threat in Europe like it hasn’t been since the days of authoritarian regimes. The DSA is being used to silence dissent.”
At the event, the U.S. State Department also expressed “deep concern” about the DSA’s censorial impact with American lawmakers warning the EU against pressuring tech companies to censor. The reality is that even American-owned platforms and American citizens could be censored under the DSA.
Hope for Free Speech in Europe
At the event, Paul Coleman laid out concrete actions to oppose censorship under the DSA:
- Member States can challenge the DSA at the European Court of Justice.
- Elected officials can demand answers from the European Commission.
- Civil society can (and must) raise its voice
“Every single European’s rights are jeopardized by this legislation,” he said. “The more people speak out, the more pressure the Commission will feel. And the more likely we are to defeat this law.”
We’re committed to repealing or substantially reforming this censorial law. This was the first conference of its kind in the European Parliament, but it won’t be the last.
Conclusion: Censorship or Conscience? Europe Must Choose
The freedom to speak truth — even when it offends — is not a fringe concern. It is the bedrock of any truly free society. Without it, democracy itself begins to erode.
If sharing a Bible verse is labelled “hate speech,” and silent prayer or peaceful conversation becomes a criminal act, then free speech in Europe is under serious threat.
That’s why the warnings from The Economist and Vice President Vance could not be timelier.
When both a globally respected publication and a prominent international leader sound the alarm, it underscores the seriousness of the threat and powerfully affirms the urgency of ADF International’s mission.
This moment should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers and the public alike. The erosion of fundamental freedoms can no longer be dismissed or ignored.
We at ADF International are committed to advancing the God-given right to live and speak the truth. Through legal support, strategic litigation, and international advocacy, we are working to ensure that freedom of speech, thought, and expression remains defended and protected.
