An open letter signed by 57,900 people has urged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to defend freedom of thought after an army veteran was prosecuted for silently praying outside an abortion clinic.
The letter argues freedom of thought is “under threat”.
It reads: “Freedom of thought is our most basic and precious of rights – and has long been recognised in British law and every major human rights document from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights onwards.
"Yet this hard-fought-for right is under threat in the wake of recent criminal proceedings against Isabel Vaughan-Spruce (twice) and Fr Sean Gough, who were recently subjected to arrest and prosecution for the thoughts taking place in the privacy of their mind near abortion centres before being acquitted by the criminal courts and compensated by the police."
Last tweek, army veteran Adam-Smith Connor, was sentenced at Poole Magistrates Court to a conditional discharge and was ordered to pay prosecution costs of £9,000 for silently praying for his deceased son within a buffer zone - an area that makes it illegal to intentionally influence someone's decision to seek abortion services within a 150-metre radius.
Connor's legal team, ADF UK, is now considering options to appeal the decision.
The letter sent to Starmer also cited the case of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was awarded £13,000 earlier this year after West Midlands Police unlawfully arrested her twice for silently praying in her head within a Birmingham “buffer zone.”
It also mentions Livia Tossici-Bolt, set to stand trial in March 2025 for holding a sign in a buffer zone inviting conversation, and Father Sean Gough, acquitted of charges for praying near an abortion clinic with a sign reading “praying for freedom of speech” and a small pro-life sticker on his car.
The letter concluded: "Prime Minister, we urge you to refrain from issuing guidance that ignores the courts, domestic and international law, and the fundamental rights of the members of public who put you into power. The slippery slope is clear; if the criminal law requires us to refrain from ‘offensive’ thoughts anywhere, there is simply no logical endpoint. Today, it’s pro-life views that offend progressive social orthodoxies; tomorrow, it could be gender-critical views and gender-critical buffer zones. A genuinely democratic society must champion diversity of thought and the free and frank exchange of views.
"We cannot consistently champion human rights abroad whilst negating the most basic of rights at home.
"Prime Minister, please act urgently to ensure that thought is never buffered, censored or criminalised."