Ministers accused of watering down rules around buffer zones outside abortion clinics
Ministers have been accused of weakening guidelines around new buffer zones outside abortion clinics after it emerged campaigners could still hold silent prayers and approach women visiting clinics to discuss the issue.
New draft guidelines published by the Home Office have been met with concern by those campaigning for the 150 meter safe zones, due to be introduced in the spring.
MPs voted last year in favor of an amendment to the Public Order Act to introduce buffer zones to prevent women from being harassed with leaflets, shown photos of fetuses and/or having to pass vigils when entering abortion clinics.
But the draft guidance, first reported by i newspaper, still appears to leave room for some approaches to women visiting clinics within the safe zones.
It says: “The term ‘influence’ is not defined in law and therefore has its ordinary dictionary meaning. The government expects that ‘influence’ requires more than just mentioning abortion or providing information. Informing, discussing or offering help does not necessarily have to amount to ‘influence’.”
The guidance adds: “Prayer within a safe access zone should not automatically be considered unlawful. Prayer has long had legal protection in Britain and this protection has not changed.
“Silent prayer, being the engagement of the mind and thought in prayer to God, is protected as an absolute right under the Human Rights Act 1998 and should not in itself be considered an offense under any circumstances. However, if a person prays but his/her behavior is also pushy, this is likely to be an offense under (the amendment).”
Asked about the guidelines, the Prime Minister’s official spokesperson said: “The government’s position is that no one should be subjected to intimidation or harassment. Police and local authorities have the power to restrict harmful protests. It is understood that parliament has expressed its will to introduce a safe abortion zone, to ensure that women visiting abortion services are not harassed. We are discussing those guidelines, how this policy should be implemented, and ensuring that it achieves its objectives without affecting fundamental human rights.”
However, those who campaigned for the legislation said the guidelines were disappointing.
Stella Creasy, the Labor MP, said of X: “This government is hypocritical. They are using the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) to block the introduction of abortion buffer zones that this parliament voted for, while also trying to prevent them from being used to protect refugees from torture. Human rights are universal and are not a shield for Sunak to be thrown away at his discretion.”
The purpose of the Human Rights Act was to incorporate the rights set out in the ECHR into British law.
Rupa Huq, the Labor MP, told the i newspaper: “It seems completely defying logic that after MPs from all parties voted overwhelmingly to introduce robust legislation to ensure women are not prevented from exercising of their right to use abortion clinics, based on successful existing ‘safe access zones’ in Australia and Canada, the draft legal guidelines released for consultation seek to undo all this.”
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are publicly consulting on the non-statutory guidance on Safe Access Zones for abortion clinics. All comments will be considered before the Home Office publishes the final version of the guidelines.”