The Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) behind the country’s controversial abortion “buffer zone” laws has suggested that the laws doesn’t go far enough and that the scale of the zones may have to be increased.
At present the law prohibits harassing, coercing and even influencing an individual inside 200 metres of Scottish abortion centres.
Gillian Mackay, an MSP for the Green Party, and said even under the present law, she has received complaints from people claiming to feel intimidated by anti-abortion individuals.
The law has been described as an attack on free speech, because it sets the precedent of telling Scottish people which topics they’re allowed to debate and where.
The first woman to be arrested under the brand new law, Rose Docherty, 74, said that she had made every effort to comply with the law, arguing that her actions didn’t constitute harassment, coercion and even influence.
Docherty was arrested after standing silently within the zone around Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow. She was holding an indication that read “coercion is a criminal offense, here to speak, only should you want”.
Speaking to the BBC, Docherty said, “I gave consideration to what I used to be doing … I checked out the law and saw what it said I couldn’t do, and thought, okay, well that is what I can do … I can offer to listen, and if anyone wants to return and speak to me, they’ll achieve this, only in the event that they want to return and speak with me.”
The police took a special view and arrested her. She was later told that she wouldn’t face prosecution on the condition that she accepted a proper warning. However, Docherty refused the warning, claiming she had done nothing improper.
Docherty could face an infinite advantageous under the law and has said she is willing to go to prison over her stand. It is now as much as the authorities to make your mind up how hard they want to pursue this and whether or not they wish to test the difficulty in court.
Docherty told ADF International, which is supporting her, “I can be willing to go to prison on the difficulty because I’m unshakably convinced that no person needs to be criminalised for a peaceful offer to talk on any public land in Britain.
“This is a free and democratic society, and no threat of imprisonment will change my mind that what I did was right, completely harmless and in accordance with the aim and intention of international human rights laws.”

