Subscribe
In 2018, the first “Buffer Zone” around an abortion clinic was established in the London Borough of Ealing. These zones were created to give local authorities the power to set up designated areas around abortion clinics where certain activities, such as protests, were restricted. While the government at the time rejected the idea of implementing a nationwide policy across England and Wales, it stated that the matter would remain under review. Pro-choice advocates strongly supported the introduction of these zones, arguing that they were necessary to protect women accessing abortion services from harassment and intimidation. On the other side, pro-life groups voiced concerns, with some claiming that the buffer zones would “criminalise prayer” — a claim that was largely dismissed by proponents of the zones.
Fast forward to March 6th, 2023, when Elizabeth Vaughan-Spruce was arrested for the second time outside an abortion facility in Birmingham. Her case attracted significant attention as it raised important questions about the balance between public order and individual freedoms, particularly the freedom to pray — even silently — in a public space. When questioned by police officers, Vaughan-Spruce maintained that she was not protesting or engaging in any activity that was prohibited by the buffer zone’s restrictions. However, the police response highlighted the sensitivity of the issue. They told her, “But you’ve said you’re engaging in prayer, which is the offence.” Vaughan-Spruce replied that it was “silent prayer,” but the officers insisted, “No, but you were still engaging in prayer. It is an offence.” Vaughan-Spruce was subsequently arrested by six officers for breaching what is officially known as a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO).
It’s worth reflecting on the implications of the police officer’s words, particularly given the unique constitutional framework of England. Unlike many modern nations, the United Kingdom is not a secular state; the Church of England is the established church, and Bishops sit as of right in the House of Lords, the upper house of Parliament. Yet, in this instance, prayer — the very act of engaging in a religious practice, even silently and privately — was deemed an offence by law. Vaughan-Spruce’s arrest came only weeks after she had been found not guilty of a similar offence, raising questions about the consistency of the law’s application. After months of delay, it was ultimately decided that the case would not proceed.
The issues surrounding buffer zones are not confined to England alone. In Northern Ireland, a separate case is unfolding that will test the boundaries of similar legislation. Courts there are preparing to rule on the case of Clare Brennan, the first woman to be arrested under legislation passed by Stormont in 2021, which established buffer zones across the province. Brennan, from Antrim, was arrested just a week after the law took effect. Her arrest took place outside a hospital in County Derry, where she and a colleague were praying. Brennan is now challenging the prosecution, which is due to be heard on July 30th. Like Vaughan-Spruce, she is being supported by the Christian Legal Centre, which has taken on her case. The Centre argues that Brennan was exercising her religious freedom by praying “The Lord’s Prayer” outside the hospital. However, under the ‘safe access zones’ legislation, she could face a fine or even six months imprisonment if found guilty.
These cases — one in Birmingham and the other in Northern Ireland — have brought the issue of buffer zones into the public consciousness, reigniting debate over where the line should be drawn between protecting women seeking medical care and preserving individual rights to free speech and religious expression. Pro-choice advocates argue that buffer zones are essential to ensuring women can access abortion services without fear or intimidation. They point to incidents of harassment outside clinics as justification for their stance. On the other hand, pro-life groups contend that the restrictions go too far, effectively criminalising peaceful protest and even private acts of prayer.
The debate over buffer zones is not just a legal one; it touches on deeper philosophical and moral questions about the nature of freedom, the role of religion in public life, and the extent to which the state can and should intervene in personal conduct. For those who support the zones, the focus remains on the rights of women to access healthcare in a safe, harassment-free environment. For those opposed, the concern is that the legislation represents an overreach, curbing fundamental freedoms in the name of public order.
As the legal battles in both England and Northern Ireland unfold, the outcomes will likely have broader implications for how buffer zones are enforced and interpreted in the future. The cases of Vaughan-Spruce and Brennan may well set important precedents, determining whether silent prayer, even in a public space near an abortion clinic, constitutes a criminal offence, and whether the balance between public safety and individual rights is being appropriately struck.