Make a submission to the Home Office Review:

There is currently pressure in the UK from abortion provider BPAS to introduce censorship zones around abortion centres. The Government have launched a public consultation about vigils outside abortion facilities.

It is essential that as many voices against the introduction of censorship zones are heard as part of the consultation. The law already protects people against abuse or harassment in public and censorship zones would set a dangerous precedent in censoring segments of civil society.

Please use the form on the right to make your submission that will be emailed to the Home Office. Alternatively, if you would prefer to respond to the full survey, you can do that here. We have also put together a guide to help you complete the full survey, which you can find here .

Dear Home Secretary,

I am writing to respond to your so-called consultation on ‘protests’ outside abortion clinics.

A consultation only in name
I am responding to this consultation by email as I believe that the online form is framed primarily to collect allegations and testimony against vigil attendees. It is not collecting substantiated evidence of wrongdoing. The ‘consultation’ is not framed to encourage a full response from the public about the merits and dangers of buffer zones. As such I believe this is not a proper consultation on the issue and I wish for such a view to be noted.

The title of the consultation itself suggests bias, and that the existing format is simply legitimising a pre-conceived conclusion. Besides, vigils have been branded as simply a ‘protest’ when in fact they are often a mixture of charitable outreach, expression of religious belief and the free assembly of citizens among many other things.

There have not been widespread calls for new powers from police or legal experts; instead, the consultation is the result of an effective BPAS lobbying effort, an organisation that would gain financially from the implementation of so-called ‘buffer zones’.

Moreover, a national consultation on the prospect of such a draconian imposition that bans citizens from everyday activities should be the result of a proven ‘problem’, including substantiated evidence of criminal behaviour. I have not seen this evidence presented by campaigners nor by the Home Office itself.

Why buffer zones would be bad for society
In addition to the direct effect on women who rely on the help of vigils, I believe the implementation of national ‘buffer zones’ would be bad for society.

There are wide-ranging powers available for authorities to keep public order and protect the public from genuine harassment and intimidation. Such powers are already so wide-ranging and discretionary that civil rights campaigners have consistently criticised them.

Existing public order powers include local injunctions to prevent nuisance or distress, and include powers of arrest as well as criminal behaviour orders for problem individuals. There are wide powers to prosecute assault and harassment in the Criminal Justice Act 1998, Protection Against Harassment Act 1997 and in the Public Order Act 1986. The police also have powers of dispersal under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2014 and the Public Order Act 1986.

Having noted the existence of such wide-ranging powers, it would be an unnecessarily draconian measure to institute ‘buffer zones’; this is especially the case given the lack of arrests, injunctions, and prosecutions of vigil attendees over decades of helping women.

Moreover, as civil rights groups have noted, the notion of ‘buffer zones’ is in direct contravention of the principle of ‘minimal criminalisation’. This principle holds that the state shouldn’t look to criminalise its citizens unnecessarily. I am deeply concerned that the state is looking to impose a ‘one size fits all’ approach to very particular circumstances all over the country. Furthermore, criminal charges should follow proven criminal behaviour, whereas ‘buffer zones’ risk criminalising thousands of citizens for otherwise legal actions.

So-called ‘buffer zones’ would violate many human rights all at once. The Human Rights Act 1998 guarantees the ability of all people to practise freedom of public assembly, freedom of speech freedom of religion, and freedom to share information. Buffer zones would compromise the exercise of those rights.

‘Buffer zones’ would also be bad for democracy too. The right of free assembly of citizens, freedom of speech and the right to protest would all be violated by ‘buffer zones’. I agree with the judges in Handyside v UK: “Freedom of expression ... is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society".

I note that the government’s recent policy announcements on the danger of safe spaces at universities would be contradicted by the introduction of ‘buffer zones’.

In summary, I believe the proposal to introduce so-called buffer zones to be unconstitutional, bad for society, violating of human rights, damaging to charitable outreach and based on little or no substantiated evidence. I wholeheartedly reject the proposal to introduce ‘buffer zones’.

Add your own comments:

If you want to only submit the response set-out above, please delete the text in this section below before you click send. If you want to add your own comments to your submission, please add them below. We have put some guidance notes in there to give you an idea of what to include. Remember if you want to make a full submission from scratch we have details on how to do this here.

I agree to Be Here For Me using this response anonymously as part of their Be Here For Me campaign to prevent censorship outside abortion clinics.

Keep me up to date with the Be Here For Me campaign. We use MailChimp to manage our membership lists and communicate with subscribers. You can read MailChimp’s privacy policy here. MailChimp will store your data securely, and neither Be Here For Me nor MailChimp will share your data with anyone else.

By submitting this form, I agree to you forwarding the above message, my name, phone number and email address to the Home Office's Abortion Clinic Protest Review team. I understand my data may be retained for monitoring purposes. See our Privacy policy here.


About Us

We are mothers against the ban on help outside abortion clinics. There is currently pressure in the UK from abortion provider BPAS to introduce censorship zones around abortion centres.

This would prevent people from offering help to women outside abortion centres in in the UK. Our campaign has been formed to oppose the introduction of censorship zones outside abortion centres. Please check back soon to see more information on us and to see how you can support the campaign.

To get in contact with us with an inquiry or for media interviews please contact info@behereforme.org.