The Scottish Parliament is considering “the world’s most extreme buffer zone law”. Gillian MacKay MSP’s Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill would impose 200-metre zones around hospitals and clinics (and potentially abortion pill-dispensing GP centres and pharmacies) in which pro-life activity, including silent vigils, is banned.

That’s about the length of two football fields.

In England and Wales 150-metre zones have been legalised, and 100 metres in Northern Ireland. Scotland’s law is draconian.

Within the Scottish zones – and just outside – actions likely to exert influence regarding abortion would be forbidden, including signs visible from within the zones, and private conversations heard there.  

A Scottish Parliament Policy Memorandum speaks of distress caused by anti-abortion campaigners but it fails to describe the distressing and indeed lethal process of abortion. It emphasises the need to protect “healthcare professionals”, even though harassment is already illegal. It stresses the need for healthcare for women suffering sexual violence and rape, but abortion is not some sort of cure for sexual violence -- rather it provides protection for rapists and abusers.

The Memorandum acknowledges the zones’ impact on the right to thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression, assembly and association. But it insists with Pollyannish optimism that the law will be selectively applied and that the European Court of Human Rights protects the privacy of clinic users and staff. It claims women have the right to access abortion like “any other form of medical treatment” -- although this “medical treatment” involves killing.

It seems Scotland is aiming for an even more aggressive law, while seeing these zones, with their blanket ban on free expression, as “safe means of offering protection” – but not to babies.

The law is also future proofed: abortion providers may apply for extensions, and there is no stipulated limit to their boundaries. The Memorandum admits that powers to deal with anti-social behaviour already exist, but under this law, it is not necessary for individuals to cause offence/alarm/distress to find themselves criminalised.  Having decided that any criticism of abortion, whether explicit or implicit, is harmful, its framers would outlaw harmless individuals because their behaviour might harm someone, somewhere, sometime. And fines of up to £10,000 can be imposed on summary conviction, or on indictment, an unlimited fine.

Double standards abound. The law will not prevent demonstrations -- including picketing -- by other groups. But the Scottish Human Rights Commission believes it “will have positive impacts for young people, disabled people, trans people, women, pregnant people and new mothers, women of colour and lesbian and bisexual women and men who attend these services”.  

Similarly, a Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment found the law would “have a positive effect on children and young people by reducing potential distress for children and young people who access abortion care, attend appointments with parents or carers, or generally access healthcare settings where anti-abortion activity might take place”. However, they fail to note the negative effect of discrimination against children yet unborn, purely on the basis of their place of residence: the womb.

The Scottish Parliament’s Summary of the Bill states that it could also cover “pro-abortion activity”, but this law targets peaceful pro-life activity, while vociferous and even violent pro-abortion protests are tolerated.  

Right to Life notes that this attempt to impose illimitable censorship zones is opposed by a majority of Scots (77.13%). Nevertheless, the Health, Social Care, and Sport Committee has unanimously agreed to its “overall principles”. As RTL notes, it is “a direct attack on free expression and public association based on viewpoint” and “is entirely unnecessary insofar as harassment and intimidation are already illegal.”

No doubt if these peaceful pro-lifers aggressively demonstrated in support of terror organisations, their right to free speech would be firmly upheld, regardless of any distress caused.

Police Scotland have found no evidence of pro-lifers involved in criminality or abuse. “Harassment” has been redefined solely in the case of abortion to mean anything short of hearty approval. The help provided by pro-life vigils, for which many women have expressed gratitude, is ignored by opponents, while the BBC and the Guardian are forced to illustrate their “buffer zones” stories with pictures of pro-abortion protests.