Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen submits testimony before Canadian Senate Human Rights Committee on C-9 “Hate Speech” Bill

Päivi reads her bible in the Finnish Parliament building.
  • Päivi Räsänen shares her experience of prosecution and conviction by Finnish authorities for peacefully expressing Christian beliefs about marriage and human sexuality
  • Räsänen submitted testimony as Canadian Senate considers amending criminal code to weaken protections for opinions expressed on religious subjects
Päivi reads her bible in the Finnish Parliament building.

OTTAWA (2 JUNE 2026) – Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, who was criminally convicted for a decades-old church booklet about marriage and sexual ethics, was invited to submit a testimony before the Canadian Senate Human Rights Committee on the C-9 bill concerning “hate speech”.

In her testimony, submitted for the hearing on 1 June, Räsänen discussed her experience of facing a seven-year prosecution and three criminal trials for sharing her Christian beliefs about marriage on social media and in a booklet written for her church. Citing her narrow conviction by the Finnish Supreme Court, Räsänen warned the Committee of the dangers of removing protections for religious speech in the public square.

The former Interior Minister’s testimony comes as Canada’s House of Commons considers Bill C-9, which proposes to weaken protections for speech on religious matters in the Canadian criminal code.

The bill, among other things, removes a provision that protects religious statements made in “good faith”, potentially criminalising religious speech that would otherwise be lawful.

If passed, the bill would enable the prosecution of religious speech if the courts consider that it “wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group”. It carries a punishment of up to two years’ imprisonment.

“My experience in Finland has shown me that laws which criminalize speech have a very real cost not only to individuals, but also society at large. They encourage law-abiding citizens to censor their speech, and deprive wider society of conversations of critical importance."

- Päivi Räsänen

In her testimony, Räsänen emphasised the dangers that “hate speech” laws pose for fundamental freedoms and democratic societies:

“Censorship is one of the greatest existential threats to today’s democracies in Europe. You do not need to agree with my beliefs to see the danger of criminalizing peaceful speech. When the state controls which ideas and beliefs may be expressed, democracy becomes fragile. My case reveals where this path can lead.

“My experience in Finland has shown me that laws which criminalize speech have a very real cost not only to individuals, but also society at large. They encourage law-abiding citizens to censor their speech, and deprive wider society of conversations of critical importance.

Räsänen further warned against ambiguous “hate speech” legislation that criminalises the peaceful expression of certain beliefs. She recalled the Finnish Supreme Court’s decision to uphold her conviction despite acknowledging that her booklet “did not contain incitement to violence or comparable threat-like fomenting of hatred”.

She added that censorial legislation has negative consequences both for those prosecuted and others who will no longer feel able to express their views:

“Even when courts ultimately acquit, our story shows how the process itself becomes the punishment. We have faced years of investigation, public scrutiny, and legal uncertainty. This creates a chilling effect, not just for Christians, but for everyone who holds views outside a narrow, state-approved consensus… Through fear, “hate speech” laws undermine public discourse and drive diverse views from the public square.”

Räsänen concluded: “I look forward to the day when the fundamental right to free speech is upheld for all who seek to peacefully express their convictions.”

Background

In March 2026, Räsänen was found guilty of “insult” by the Finnish Supreme Court for expressing her Christian beliefs about human sexuality in a 2004 booklet produced for her church. Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola and the Luther Foundation Finland were convicted alongside her for publishing the booklet.

The long-serving Finnish parliamentarian’s nearly seven-year criminal prosecution began after she shared her Christian beliefs about marriage and sexual ethics in a 2019 tweet, leading to a police investigation that resulted in further charges for expressing her beliefs in a 2019 live radio debate and authoring the 2004 church booklet.

Formally charged with “agitation against a minority group” in 2021, Räsänen was acquitted on all charges by two lower courts in 2022 and 2023. Nevertheless, the state prosecutor appealed the decision concerning the Bible verse tweet and church booklet. In a narrow 3-2 ruling, the Finnish Supreme Court upheld the acquittal for the tweet but convicted Räsänen, the Bishop and the Luther Foundation Finland for the booklet.

In May, Räsänen announced her intention to appeal her case to the European Court of Human Rights, alongside Bishop Pohjola and the Luther Foundation Finland.

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

Crown Office backs down following free speech victory of Scottish Christian grandmother cleared in court for offering consensual conversation in ‘buffer zone’

  • Rose Docherty, 75, was cleared in court on 27 April, following arrest for offering consensual conversation
  • Scottish prosecutor had one week to appeal ruling, which expired earlier this month
  • With ADF International’s support, Mrs Docherty is now considering all options to prevent the recurrence of her arrest and treatment, including legal action against the police

GLASGOW (22 May 2026) – The Crown Office has backed down and refused to appeal the case of a Glaswegian Catholic grandmother, who was cleared in court after offering to speak with people in a “buffer zone”.

Rose Docherty, 75, was cleared at Glasgow Sheriff Court on 27 April, when the judge dismissed two criminal charges of “influencing” against her, in the first ever victory under censorial national legislation introducing abortion facility “buffer zones” in the UK.

In a development that reinforces last month’s free speech victory, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, Scotland’s public prosecutor, has refused to appeal the ruling and is now timed out of doing so.

They had one week to appeal the ruling, which expired on Tuesday 5 May. ADF International coordinated Mrs Docherty’s legal defence.

The 75-year-old Christian grandmother was arrested last September merely for offering to speak with people in the vicinity of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow and holding a sign that read: “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want”, leading to outcry across the world, including from the US State Department.

She did not approach anyone, did not speak about abortion, did not engage in any behaviour that was obstructing, harassing or intimidating and was not protesting.

Following her arrest, Mrs 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 had a double hip replacement.

With ADF International’s support, Mrs Docherty is now considering all options to prevent the recurrence of her arrest and treatment, including legal action against the police

Last September was the second time Mrs Docherty had been arrested for peacefully offering consensual conversation in a “buffer zone”. Her first arrest for peaceful expression was on 19 February 2025, and the Procurator Fiscal later backed down and decided not to proceed with a prosecution in August, in a free speech win.

“Peaceful expression, which is protected by national and international law, can never be a crime."

- Rose Docherty

Mrs Docherty was the first person to be criminally charged under Scotland’s 2024 “buffer zone” law, which forbids the “influencing” of anyone seeking to access, provide or facilitate abortion and is enforced within 200 metres of every hospital where abortions occur. There are similar “buffer zone” laws in England and Wales and Northern Ireland.

On 27 April, Sheriff Stuart Reid dismissed two charges of “influencing” against Mrs Docherty, ruling that the charges violated her Article 10 ECHR right to freedom of expression.

Sheriff Reid found that the charges were not “prescribed by law”, since they failed to state or identify another person in the “buffer zone” that was present for the purpose of accessing, providing or facilitating abortion, and who was criminally “influenced” by Mrs Docherty’s actions, as is required by the law.

The judge concluded that the Procurator Fiscal had “failed to disclose an offence known to the law of Scotland” and dismissed the case pro loco et tempore, meaning the matter can be brought back if prosecutors bring improved evidence and decide that a prosecution continues to be in the public interest.

Rose Docherty said:

“I am very pleased with this development, which reinforces that offering consensual conversation is not a crime on any public street in Scotland—regardless of whether or not that street is in a ‘buffer zone’. Today, there is sadly an epidemic of loneliness and people experience coercion every day. An offer to speak, which can be freely accepted or refused by any person, could really help someone and should never be criminalised.

“Peaceful expression, which is protected by national and international law, can never be a crime. The authorities should learn from their failed attempts to censor me—a 75-year-old Christian grandmother, who has always lived in Glasgow—and refrain in the future from criminalising me or any person who lawfully expresses their rights in this country.

“I repeat my call for ‘buffer zone’ laws to be repealed in Scotland and across the UK, to prevent them being used to censor peaceful expression like mine.

“I am now consulting with my legal team and considering what actions are necessary, including legal action, to ensure the authorities are not able to repeatedly arrest, imprison and prosecute me for peacefully exercising my right to free speech.“

Barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International, Jeremiah Igunnubole commented:

“Rose’s free speech win last month has now been solidified by the Crown Office’s decision not to appeal. This is a victory for freedom of expression in Scotland and across the UK.

“Regardless of whether people agree with Rose’s pro-life and Christian views, all should be able to agree that offering to speak with people in a public space is not a crime and must never be treated as one.

“However, ‘buffer zone’ legislation across the UK continues to dangerously undermine the rule of law. It is inconsistent that Rose has been vindicated in Scotland, while our clients Livia Tossici-Bolt and Adam Smith-Connor have been criminally convicted for peaceful expression in ‘buffer zones’ elsewhere in the UK.

“The only way to robustly protect fundamental rights, uphold the rule of law in the UK, and ensure that ‘buffer zones’ are not used as a tool to censor lawful conduct is to repeal the deeply flawed, anti-free speech laws that impose thought-crime restrictions in Scotland and across the UK.

“We have already seen the US State Department strongly criticise the UK’s ‘buffer zone’ censorship and express deep concern over the cases of Rose and our other clients. If politicians do not act to protect free speech, the alarming reality is that Great Britain will cease to be a place where human rights are respected as they once were, and our reputation on the world stage will suffer as a result.

“Although Rose has been vindicated, she should never have been arrested. The process has become the punishment, with a deeply concerning chilling effect on free speech more broadly.

“We are now supporting Rose in considering all her options, including legal action, to ensure such treatment is not repeated or normalised. Standing in a public space offering a consensual conversation is not, as Sheriff Reid put it, “an offence not known to the law of Scotland”. We will continue to stand with Rose to keep the peaceful exercise of free speech rights out of the criminal courts.”

Background

Mrs Docherty’s censorial arrest sparked expressions of concern in the UK and around the world, including from the US State Department, which described it as “another egregious example of the tyrannical suppression of free speech happening across Europe”, and from the Scottish Catholic Bishops’ Conference.

The architect of Scotland’s 2024 “buffer zone” law, Gillian Mackay MSP, admitted on BBC Scotland that the vague prohibitions in the legislation could criminalise someone for praying visibly from a window in their home within the zone, “depending on who’s passing by the window”. 

US Vice President JD Vance highlighted this law as a particular matter for concern in his Munich Security Conference speech in February last year.

Read more about the case here.

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

(First and second pictures: Rose Docherty and Legal Counsel for ADF International Jeremiah Igunnubole outside Glasgow Sheriff Court, following the ruling clearing Rose on 27 April; Rose Docherty outside the court)

Australian court dismisses appeal to uphold biological reality in ‘What is a woman?’ case

  • Australian Federal Court rules that “Giggle for Girls” app’s female-only membership policy “directly discriminated” against man who identifies as woman 
  • Founder Sall Grover has indicated she intends to appeal to Australia’s highest court  

SYDNEY (15 May 2026) – The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia today ruled against a female-only networking app, in a blow to upholding biological reality and women-only spaces.  

The Court dismissed an appeal from Sall Grover, founder of female networking app Giggle for Girls, who in August 2024 was ruled to have “indirectly discriminated” against Roxanne Tickle, a man who identifies as a woman, by removing him from the app. The 2024 Tickle v. Giggle ruling stated that “sex is not confined to being a biological concept”. 

The Federal Court today ruled that Grover and Giggle for Girls had engaged in “direct discrimination”, following a cross-appeal of the lower court’s decision by Tickle, and awarded Tickle $20,000 AUD in damages plus legal costs capped at $100,000 AUD. 

ADF International supported Grover and Giggle’s case on the basis that Australian law should uphold biological reality and protect women’s spaces in accordance with international human rights law. 

Tickle’s discrimination claim was made under the Sex Discrimination Act, which was amended in 2013 to include “gender identity” and to remove definitions of “man” and “woman”.  

Today’s ruling stated: “While this appeal raises issues on which there are differing views within the community, it is important to emphasise that the issues for determination by the Court involve the construction and application of provisions of the SDA [Sex Discrimination Act]. The desirability or otherwise of that law is not a matter open to this Court to consider.” 

“I am absolutely devastated. Men who claim to be women have more rights than actual women in Australia. It is women who are being discriminated against, not the men who claim to be us. But in a sense, nothing has changed: we will all wake up tomorrow & men will still not be women.”

- Sall Grover

Grover reacted to the ruling on X: 

“I am absolutely devastated. Men who claim to be women have more rights than actual women in Australia. It is women who are being discriminated against, not the men who claim to be us. But in a sense, nothing has changed: we will all wake up tomorrow & men will still not be women.” 

The Court previously ruled in Tickle’s favour, finding that he experienced “indirect discrimination,” and ordered “Giggle for Girls” to pay $10,000 AUD in compensation and to cover Tickle’s legal costs.  

In December 2025, Grover’s appeal maintaining that the term “female” referred to biological females only, was heard before the Full Court.  

The Court today rejected Grover’s appeal and allowed Tickle’s counter appeal that he had experienced “direct discrimination”. 

“A law written to protect women has been used to punish a woman for creating a space for women. That is what today’s judgment means in practice,” said Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International.  

“The addition of ‘gender identity’ to the Sex Discrimination Act has been used to undermine the most basic conception of what a woman is. The need for single-sex spaces is recognised in international human rights law. It must be recognised in Australian law too, and if the courts will not say so, then Parliament must.” 

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

East African Court case filed: Christian communities in DRC left unable to worship after targeted attacks on churches, charities

  • Religious freedom advocates demand a halt to attacks, financial compensation to rebuild destroyed churches; ADF International legally supporting the case.  
  • Continued attacks in the region aimed to destroy the central Christian religious pillars of the Banyamulenge ethnic group. 

NAIROBI (14 MAY 2026)  – Christian communities in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have been left unable to freely practice their faith following a series of targeted attacks that have destroyed churches and other religious sites. In a case filed at the East African Court of Justice, advocates are calling for DRC recognition of the damage inflicted during an attack on Banyamulenge Christian sites in the city of Uvira in January 2026, as well as compensation to rebuild places of worship that have been destroyed in these targeted attacks.  

The violence has not only resulted in loss of life and property, but has also undermined their ability to gather for worship. The destruction has left many without safe spaces for communal gathering, prayer, or religious community. 

“This is the often-overlooked aftermath of ethnic and religiously motivated violence. Beyond the immediate devastation, these attacks leave lasting scars on communities. In this case, these Christians from the Banyamulenge community in the DRC are now significantly hindered in their ability to worship, gather and live out their faith."

- Sean Nelson, Senior Counsel for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International

“This is the often-overlooked aftermath of ethnic and religiously motivated violence,” said Sean Nelson, Senior Counsel for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International. “Beyond the immediate devastation, these attacks leave lasting scars on communities. In this case, these Christians from the Banyamulenge community in the DRC are now significantly hindered in their ability to worship, gather and live out their faith.” 

The primary attack took place on 18 January 2026, when the DRC military and aligned militia groups recaptured the city of Uvira from M23 rebels who had occupied the city for months. However, members within the newly arrived forces then began deliberately destroying five Christian churches and other faith-based organisations held and used by the Banyamulenge community. The Banyamulenge are Congolese ethnic Tutsis that militant and radical ethnic Hutus have falsely accused of sympathy with foreign forces. Additionally, over 70 Banyamulenge homes were destroyed. These attacks were specifically carried out to destroy the central Christian religious pillars of the Banyamulenge in Uvira as a means of erasing their ethno-religious identity.  

Advocates are now calling on authorities in the DRC to take immediate action to halt further attacks and ensure the protection of vulnerable religious communities. ADF International is supporting the case before the court. The case was filed at the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) on 11 March 2026 at the subregistry in Nairobi. The EACJ filing included affidavits from leaders and members of the Uvira church communities affected. 

“It is only right that the DRC acts swiftly to prevent further violence, takes responsibility and supports the reconstruction of destroyed churches and religious properties,” said Innocent Nteziryayo, named counsel for the churches and representatives for the Banyamulenge community before the East African Court of Justice. “Banyamulenge communities must be able to rebuild not only their homes, but also the churches and organizations that sustain their spiritual and communal life.” 

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

Christian woman wins legal challenge against Muslim designation in Iraq’s official database

  • Ruling affirms right of Iraqi Christians to freely choose their religion, sets persuasive precedent for scores of Christians in Iraq facing serious legal and personal consequences of state-assigned religion
  • Case will advance to Iraq’s highest court, could enshrine protections from state-assigned religion into law; ADF International supports the case.

*Name has been changed to protect identity.

BAGHDAD, IRAQ (12 May 2026) — An Iraqi court has ruled in favor of a young Christian woman, Maryam*, allowing her to have her official religious status corrected in the government’s database after she was automatically registered as Muslim under Iraqi law. The significant ruling restores Maryam’s ability to live in accordance with her Christian faith and sets an important precedent for religious minorities across the region.

Despite being raised in a Christian household, Maryam and her sisters were forced by law after their mother separated from their father and remarried to a Muslim man, in accordance with Article 26(2) of the Iraqi National Card Law No. 3 of 2016, which provides that “minor children shall follow the religion of the parent who has converted to Islam.”

Upon reaching the age of legal majority, Maryam filed a legal claim in January 2025 to have her religious status corrected in the government’s database to reflect her Christian beliefs. The court’s decision affirms her right to choose her religion and have it accurately reflected in the government’s database.

“Everyone has the fundamental right to choose and live according to their religion,” Kelsey Zorzi, Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International, a legal organization supporting Maryam’s case.

“This decision sends a clear message that individuals should not be bound for life by religious classifications imposed on them as children by their parents or by government policy. No state should have the power to permanently assign a person’s religion.”

Maryam’s two younger sisters remain legally registered as Muslims. Similar legal actions will be pursued for each of them once they reach the age of majority.

In line with Iraqi law regarding decisions made in Personal Status Courts, the State will now move to appeal the decision to the Iraqi Federal Court of Cassation, which is the country’s highest court for such matters. A positive decision on appeal would strongly reinforce this victory in Iraqi jurisprudence and could serve as an influential precedent for others in similar situations..

State-assigned religion: a pervasive religious freedom restriction in the Middle East and Asia

Maryam’s case highlights a pervasive problem in many parts of the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia: the practice of state-assigned religion, in which governments record a citizen’s religion in official databases or on identification documents and make it difficult or impossible to change. In many countries, these designations are imposed without an individual’s consent—whether through clerical errors, inheritance from a parent’s conversion, or coercive government policies—and can carry severe consequences for daily life.

In Iraq and other countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, Malaysia, and Bangladesh, inaccurate or imposed religious designations can result in mandatory enrollment of children in religious education programs not of their faith, barriers to marriage, automatic assignment of children’s religion based on parental records, inheritance complications, family law conflicts, and exposure of non-Muslims to Sharia court jurisdiction. In some cases, parents assigned an inaccurate religion in government databases are forced to leave their names off their children’s birth certificates to prevent the incorrect designation from being passed down, creating additional legal issues for those families.

“Maryam was forced by law to carry a religious identity imposed on her as a child—one that did not reflect her beliefs, her upbringing, or her lived reality. Today's decision restores her ability to live in accordance with her Christian faith and sets an important precedent for others in similar situations"

- Kelsey Zorzi, Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International

Even where religion is not printed on a physical ID card, as in Iraq where religion is tracked in the government’s internal database, the designation can still create significant legal and personal consequences. These systems turn a person’s belief into a fixed, state-certified label, making it extremely difficult to freely change one’s religion or live according to one’s faith.

Maryam’s case raises fundamental questions about the compatibility of Article 26(2) of the National Card Law with constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and with Iraq’s obligations under international human rights treaties, including Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees that “everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” including the freedom to adopt a religion of one’s choice.

ADF International supported Maryam in securing legal recognition of her Christian faith and continues to advocate for broader reforms to protect religious freedom across the Middle East.

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

Finnish Parliamentarian Convicted of “Insulting” a Group for 20-year-old Church Booklet to Appeal to European Court of Human Rights

  • Päivi Räsänen announces intention to appeal to Europe’s top human rights court following criminal conviction by Finnish Supreme Court for a decades-old church booklet expressing her beliefs on marriage and sexuality
  • ADF International to represent Räsänen in landmark case for free speech across Europe

HELSINKI (7 May 2026) – A longstanding Finnish parliamentarian criminally convicted in March for “insulting” a group by her country’s Supreme Court has announced that she will appeal her case to the European Court of Human Rights, in the final legal juncture for this critical case for free speech in Europe.

Päivi Räsänen was found guilty for expressing her beliefs about marriage and sexuality in a booklet she wrote for her church over 20 years ago. Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola and the Luther Foundation Finland were also convicted for publishing the booklet for the church.

They were criminally convicted under Finland’s 2011 “hate speech” law which prohibits “agitation against a minority group” under a section of the Finnish criminal code titled “war crimes and crimes against humanity”.

The appeal comes after the former Interior Minister’s nearly seven-year prosecution and unanimous acquittal by two lower courts in Finland. In March 2026, a mixed Supreme Court ruling acquitted Räsänen for her 2019 Bible verse tweet, but convicted her and Bishop Pohjola for “making and keeping available to the public a text that insults a group” in the 2004 church booklet on sexual ethics, according to a 3:2 majority.

Commenting on her decision to appeal, Räsänen said: “The failure of the Finnish Supreme Court to uphold freedom of speech has set a dangerous precedent in my country and across Europe. I feel it is my duty to appeal this decision, to reinstate respect for the basic human right that all are free to peacefully express their views in the public square.”

“I know I am not alone in facing unjust persecution under ‘hate speech’ laws that make sharing Christian beliefs a criminal offense. I make my appeal in the hope that the European Court of Human Rights will recognise that peacefully expressing one’s beliefs is never a crime, and ensure that this basic freedom is protected for all.”

Final chance for freedom to prevail

Räsänen, a long-serving parliamentarian, medical doctor, and grandmother of twelve, has been criminally prosecuted for nearly seven years for sharing her Christian beliefs about marriage and sexuality in a 2019 tweet and live radio debate, as well as for authoring the 2004 church booklet, for which she was charged alongside Bishop Pohjola and the Luther Foundation Finland.

In 2021, Räsänen was formally charged with “agitation against a minority group” under a section of the Finnish criminal code titled “war crimes and crimes against humanity”.

Following unanimous acquittals on all charges by two lower courts in 2022 and 2023, the state prosecutor appealed again to the Finnish Supreme Court regarding the tweet and church booklet. The case was heard in October 2025, and in March 2026 the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal for the Bible verse tweet, but convicted Räsänen and the Bishop for the 2004 booklet. The radio show charge was not appealed to the Supreme Court, so that acquittal stands.

The Supreme Court convicted Räsänen under a law that was introduced years after the booklet was published, and did so despite the court’s admission that the booklet “did not contain incitement to violence or comparable threat-like fomenting of hatred”.

In an alarming display of censorship, the Supreme Court fined Räsänen, Bishop Pohjola, and the Luther Foundation Finland several thousand Euros, and ruled that the condemned statements within the booklet must be “removed from public access and destroyed”.  

“The Supreme Court’s decision to convict myself and the Luther Foundation for publishing a booklet for our church was extremely disappointing,” added Bishop Pohjola. “As a Bishop, I have a responsibility to guide those under my pastoral care, and I am deeply concerned by the state’s extensive efforts to censor our publications and decide what can and cannot be taught by religious leaders to members of their own group.

“It is our intention to join Päivi Räsänen in appealing to the European Court of Human Rights in defence of our free speech and religious freedom rights, and those of everyone in Finland.”

An appeal to the European Court of Human Rights is the final legal opportunity for the conviction to be overturned, and marks a seminal moment for the fundamental right to free speech to be upheld in Finland and throughout Europe.

“Hate speech” laws enabling state censorship

Räsänen’s case has garnered significant international interest, with the prosecution’s extensive criticism of Räsänen and Bishop Pohjola’s beliefs provoking high-profile responses, including from the US State Department.

Senior Finnish officials also questioned the ruling: Justice Minister Leena Meri argued that the legislation is “not sufficiently precise and especially not predictable as required by the principle of legality in the criminal code,” adding that “it is very difficult for people to know what is prohibited and what is permitted”.

The judgment has exacerbated existing concerns about the precarious state of free speech across Europe, where vaguely worded “hate speech” laws are increasingly wielded to silence dissenting views.

The appeal of Räsänen, who will be represented by ADF International, has significant global implications for freedom of speech.

“The retroactive censorship of a 20-year-old booklet produced by and for a church community is among the most chilling developments in the ongoing attack on freedom of speech across Europe,” said Lorcán Price, legal counsel with ADF International, serving on Räsänen’s legal team.

“As subjective ‘hate speech’ laws are increasingly being used to silence and criminalise peaceful expression of beliefs, the European Court of Human Rights has a responsibility to decisively protect the freedom of expression that is necessary in a truly democratic society.

“The ‘hate speech’ laws used to convict Päivi Räsänen and Bishop Pohjola clearly contradict international human rights law regarding freedom of speech and freedom of religion. If such laws can be interpreted so broadly as to include a decades-old church booklet, how can anyone in Finland be certain that anything they have said, or will say, will not be prosecuted? It is imperative that the European Court of Human Rights clarify and protect these fundamental freedoms definitively.”

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

Egyptian court fails to grant Easter holiday

  • Egyptian Christians currently are forced to choose between participating in Easter worship or facing serious civil, professional, and academic penalties 
  • Religious freedom advocates will appeal the rejection, with legal support from ADF International. 
  • The petition is part of movement to advance religious freedom in Egypt, removing barriers to worship in country with deep Christian heritage. 

CAIRO (30 APRIL 2026) — An Egyptian court has declined to rule on a petition to establish Easter as a national holiday, indicating that the Prime Minister should instead determine the matter. Religious freedom advocates from across Christian denominations plan to appeal the decision, seeking to remove longstanding barriers to Christian observance of Easter.  

The failure to recognize Easter as an official holiday in the country leaves in place conditions that force Egyptian Christians to choose between participating in Easter worship or facing serious civil, professional, and academic penalties.  

The court rejected the petition on procedural grounds, stating that the petition falls under the jurisdiction of the Prime Minister, not the court. 

Because Sunday is a regular working day in Egypt, Christians who observe Easter are often unable to meet work and school obligations, and thus face penalties as a result. These include loss of pay, discrimination in the workplace, and academic consequences for absences—conditions that significantly restrict the ability of Egyptian Christians to freely practice their faith.

“At a time when many Christian communities in the region face severe persecution and even erasure, this decision leaves in place barriers that prevent Christians from freely observing the holiest day of their faith. We urge Egypt to take meaningful steps to ensure that the rights of Christians are recognized and protected."

- Kelsey Zorzi, Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International

“The Court’s decision leaves Christians in Egypt unable to worship freely and without fear of penalty or discrimination on the most sacred day of their faith. This is about far more than the recognition of a holiday—it is about the denial of a legal right to worship for Christians who already face ongoing and severe religious persecution,” said Kelsey Zorzi, ADF International’s Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom.  

“Egypt has been a cradle of Christianity since the first century, with the Coptic Church tracing its origins to the Apostle Mark in Alexandria. At a time when many Christian communities in the region face severe persecution and even erasure, this decision leaves in place barriers that prevent Christians from freely observing the holiest day of their faith. We urge Egypt to take meaningful steps to ensure that the rights of Christians are recognized and protected,” stated Zorzi. 

While Egypt has taken steps in recent months to expand accommodations for Christian worship, those measures remain limited in scope and unevenly applied. A December decision by the Ministry of Manpower granting leave to Christian private-sector workers did not extend to the public sector and created disparities among Christian denominations by granting more paid leave days to Coptic Christians than Evangelicals or Catholics. 

The Court’s ruling leaves these gaps unaddressed, failing to provide consistent protection across sectors and communities. ADF International will support the appeal of the ruling, seeking to overturn the decision and secure recognition of Easter as a public holiday. 

Long-awaited recognition of the right to worship remains unmet amidst widespread persecution

Egypt is home to one of the world’s oldest Christian communities, and Christians make up a significant portion of the population alongside the Muslim majority. In this context, recognition of Easter Sunday would not have created new or numerous religious observances, but rather corrected a longstanding inequality affecting one of the country’s two primary religious communities on the most important day of its calendar. 

The decision comes against the backdrop of broader religious freedom challenges facing Christians in Egypt, including the use of blasphemy laws to prosecute individuals for expressing or defending their faith and the refusal of the State to formally recognize the religion of Christian converts on their official documents. Earlier this month, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom recommended Egypt for placement on the U.S. State Department’s Special Watch List due to the government’s perpetration or toleration of severe violations of religious freedom. 

Egypt’s blasphemy laws are often used to unjustly prosecute Christians for actions or statements deemed offensive to the dominant religion. Penalties range from hefty fines to prison sentences. Most recently, a young Coptic Christian researcher and YouTuber, Augustinos Samaan, was arrested under Egypt’s blasphemy laws and later sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and hard labor for content he posted online defending his Christian faith. Dozens of similar cases have recently been filed in criminal courts in the country. 

In another case, a Christian father was imprisoned for three years for his activity in a Facebook group discussing conversion from Islam to Christianity. ADF International has supported his legal defense and joined religious freedom leaders from the international community in demanding his release. Abdulbaqi was freed in January 2025 and has been safely reunited with his family. His case remains open before the State Security authorities. 

By declining to remove barriers to Easter observance, the Court’s decision leaves Christians in Egypt unable to freely worship on the holiest day of their faith. 

“Religious freedom includes the ability to live out one’s faith in practice and in community—not only in private belief. The Court refused an opportunity to ensure that Egypt’s Christian community can fully observe the holiest day of their faith without penalty,” Zorzi added. 

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

Free speech victory: Judge dismisses charges against Scottish grandmother arrested for offering consensual conversation in ‘buffer zone’

  • Sheriff Stuart Reid delivered ruling at hearing in Glasgow Sheriff Court yesterday morning, dismissing charges against Rose Docherty, 75
  • ADF International coordinated Mrs Docherty’s legal defence
  • Christian grandmother arrested last September for holding a sign that read: ‘Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want’ outside a Glasgow hospital

GLASGOW (28 April 2026) – A judge dismissed criminal charges against a Glaswegian grandmother who was arrested for offering consensual conversation in a “buffer zone”, in a significant victory for free speech yesterday.

Sheriff Stuart Reid’s ruling, dismissing two charges of alleged “influencing” within a “buffer zone”, against Christian grandmother Rose Docherty, 75, was delivered at Glasgow Sheriff Court on Monday morning.

Mrs Docherty was the first person to be criminally charged under Scotland’s censorial 2024 “buffer zone” law. Mrs Docherty’s advocate Jamie McGowan was instructed by law firm Lindsays. Legal advocacy organisation ADF International coordinated her legal defence.

Mrs Docherty was arrested last September for peacefully offering to speak with people in the vicinity of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow, in a “buffer zone”, and holding a sign that read: “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want”.

She did not approach anyone, did not speak about abortion, did not engage in any behaviour that was obstructing, harassing or intimidating and was not protesting.

Her censorial arrest sparked expressions of concern in the UK and around the world, including from the Scottish Catholic Bishops’ Conference and from the US State Department, who described it as “another egregious example of the tyrannical suppression of free speech happening across Europe”.

Scotland’s censorial 2024 “buffer zone” law forbids the “influencing” of anyone seeking to access “abortion services” and is enforced within 200 metres of every hospital. It is similar to Section 9 of the Public Order Act 2023, which introduced “buffer zones” around all abortion facilities in England and Wales.

Yesterday’s ruling followed a hearing on April 20, in which Mrs Docherty’s legal counsel argued that the charges against Mrs Docherty violated her Article 10 right to freedom of expression.

Mrs Docherty’s counsel noted that the charge against her was insufficiently clear and was not “prescribed by law”, since it failed to state or identify another person in the “buffer zone” that was present for the purpose of accessing, providing or facilitating the provision of abortion services, as is required by the law.

During the hearing on April 20, the Crown admitted that the presence of another individual within the zone who was accessing, providing or facilitating the provision of abortion services was an essential ingredient of the offence and, remarkably, conceded that they were still making enquiries as to how many people, if any, were influenced by Rose’s conduct within the zone.

Questioned by Sheriff Reid whether there was “any evidential basis to advance” a charge on the basis that Rose had influenced a person within the zone, the Procurator Fiscal responded, “not at the moment, but that might emerge after our further enquiries”.

Sherriff Reid concluded yesterday that the Procurator Fiscal had “failed to disclose an offence known to the law of Scotland” and dismissed the case pro loco et tempore, meaning the matter can be brought back should prosecutors bring improved evidence and decide that a prosecution continues to be in the public interest.

Last September was the second time Mrs Docherty had been arrested for peacefully offering consensual conversation in a “buffer zone”. Her first arrest for peaceful expression was on 19 February 2025, and the Procurator Fiscal later decided not to proceed with a prosecution in August.

Reacting to the ruling, Rose Docherty commented:

“This verdict is a major victory for free speech in Scotland and the UK. It shows that peacefully offering consensual conversation on a public street, which is all I have ever done, can never be a crime.

“Even though the verdict was a victory, the process in this case became a form of punishment for me. I was arrested last September and have faced seven months of criminal proceedings, merely for exercising my free speech rights. This should never happen in a free society.

“My case shows how ‘buffer zones’ are used by authorities to impose censorship. ‘Buffer zone’ legislation must be repealed in Scotland and across the UK to ensure it is not misused to target peaceful and lawful expression again in the future, as has now happened to me twice.

“The resources used by the authorities to target me, a 75-year-old grandmother, for offering to speak with people, have been totally wasted. Authorities should focus on tackling real crime in Glasgow, not censoring a Catholic grandmother.”

Barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International, Jeremiah Igunnubole commented:

“Rose’s free speech rights have been vindicated by the court in a significant victory for freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.

“The prosecution of Rose has no place in a free and democratic society. No one should ever be criminalised for peaceful speech, least of all for making a peaceful and consensual offer to speak. It is bad enough to be prosecuted for exercising a fundamental right; it is far worse that the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service brought these charges without conducting even the most basic investigative inquiries, such as establishing whether anyone had been criminally influenced by Rose’s conduct within the ‘buffer zone’.

“This prosecution is emblematic of the deepening free speech crisis in the UK. We call on the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, together with Police Scotland, to cease such targeted prosecutions and instead focus their resources on tackling the serious and growing crime problems Scotland faces.

“Above all, this case has starkly exposed the flaws in these poorly drafted, censorial, and undemocratic ‘buffer zone’ laws. They have created confusion for police officers and delivered injustice to Rose and others who have endured the humiliation of arrest, imprisonment, and prosecution simply for seeking to love their neighbour and exercise their rights in the gentlest manner possible.

“Parliament must act urgently to repeal these buffer zone laws and replace them with robust protections that genuinely strengthen freedom of expression.”

In a statement delivered outside court yesterday after the ruling, Mrs Docherty said:

“I was arrested, charged and prosecuted for nothing more than peacefully inviting consensual conversation in a public space that I was permitted to be in. When I was arrested, I was handcuffed, placed in the back of a police van and placed in a police cell for over two hours, without a chair to sit on.

“Simply for being available for the lonely, the afraid and the coerced, I have been treated like a violent criminal. But thankfully, today the charges have been dismissed. The judge ruled that the charges were irrelevant and that they were a breach of my Article 10 free speech rights.

“Thank you all for your support and prayers, thank you to ADF International and my entire legal team, who were brilliant. Nobody should be criminalised for consensual conversations and I’m glad that that truth has been vindicated here today.”

Background

Following her arrest last September, Mrs 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.

The architect of Scotland’s 2024 “buffer zone” law, Gillian Mackay MSP, admitted on BBC Scotland that the vague prohibitions in the legislation could criminalise someone for praying visibly from a window in their home within the zone, “depending on who’s passing by the window”. 

US Vice President JD Vance highlighted this law as a particular matter for concern in his Munich Security Conference speech in February last year.

In England, ADF International client Isabel Vaughan-Spruce faces trial in October for silently praying in the vicinity of an abortion facility. She is the first person to be criminally charged under Section 9 of the Public Order Act 2023—which introduced “buffer zones” around all abortion facilities in England and Wales.

Watch footage of Mrs Docherty’s arrest last year here.

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

(First and second pictures: Rose Docherty and Legal Counsel for ADF International Jeremiah Igunnubole outside Glasgow Sheriff Court, following yesterday’s ruling; Rose Docherty outside the court)

State of South Australia Admits Wrongdoing Toward Child Over “Disturbing” Sex-ed Content; Mother Shares Story with the UN

  • State admits violating its duty of care to pupil, stops short of accepting a breach of parental rights
  • Mother Nicki Gaylard speaks out to the UN; shares story of her daughter’s traumatic exposure to radical “Comprehensive Sexuality Education”
  •  

SOUTH AUSTRALIA (25 APRIL 2026) – The Australian Department of Education has admitted in legal proceedings that it breached its duty of care toward a 14-year-old girl after she was exposed to highly inappropriate and explicit sexual content at school, without parental knowledge or consent.

The admission comes in the case brought by Australian mother of six, Nicki Gaylard, who initiated legal action in December 2025 following the incident at her daughter’s school in rural South Australia.

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.

“There's a lot of trauma for my entire family after this occurred. And it's obvious that it still affects us, even today. Some might feel like it's so long ago, but it still lurks. You can't erase what you hear and what you see. It's not that easy. These things sit with you, and possibly for the rest of our lives."

- Nicki Gaylard

Yesterday, Gaylard shared her experience at the United Nations in Geneva during the 61st Session of the Human Rights Council. She addressed an event, hosted by ADF International, gathered to highlight the dangers of “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” (CSE), in the context of growing international concerns about parental rights and age-appropriate education.

CSE is an approach to sex education that goes far beyond teaching children and young people the basics of human biology and reproduction. Driven in large part by the UN and its partners, the CSE agenda seeks to impart a “rights-based” approach to children, in which they are taught to challenge sexual and gender norms, advocate for their “sexual rights,” and focus on sexual pleasure. CSE, often conducted without parental consent, violates the right of parents, enshrined in international law, to guide the education of their children in line with their moral beliefs.

“There’s a lot of trauma for my entire family after this occurred. And it’s obvious that it still affects us, even today. Some might feel like it’s so long ago, but it still lurks. You can’t erase what you hear and what you see. It’s not that easy. These things sit with you, and possibly for the rest of our lives,” shared Gaylard.

Admission from the State

In its written pleadings, the State accepted that it owed a duty of care to Gaylard’s daughter and acknowledged that this duty was breached when a third-party provider was allowed to subject the young students to CSE instruction. The Department stopped short of admitting a breach in its duty to Gaylard, demonstrating a lack of regard for the vital role of parents.

The case concerns a session delivered by external provider “headspace,” in March 2024 during which Year 9 girls were shown explicit sexual content and images of “trans bodies” displaying double mastectomy scars. The presenters used the terms “sister love” and “brother love” in reference to people who have sex with siblings and referenced bestiality, telling the girls “Don’t Google it though”. The presentation took place without parental notification, consent, or the presence of a supervising teacher.

“I took this case 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,” said Gaylard.

Following the incident, Gaylard withdrew her children from the school, citing concerns over their safety and well-being. Despite requests, the third-party provider has refused to grant her access to the materials shown during the presentation. Gaylard’s daughter experienced severe and ongoing traumatic mental health repercussions from the incident.

“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 headspace won’t even let me see. How can they be happy to show children what they are ashamed to show adults? Let children be children,” Gaylard added.

“Transparency, accountability, and respect for parental rights are essential.”

Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, said: “No parent should be kept in the dark about what their child is being taught. Transparency, accountability, and respect for parental rights are essential. This case highlights the urgent need to ensure that parents are not sidelined in decisions affecting their children.”

“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,” Clarke added.

State acknowledges multiple failures

The Department has also acknowledged multiple failures, including the lack of parental notification, failure to follow required vetting processes, and the absence of a teacher during the session. An investigation into the third-party presenter is ongoing.

ADF International is providing legal support to Gaylard’s case in line with its commitment to defend parental rights and ensure that children are protected from inappropriate content in educational settings.

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