What is permissible in terms of freedom of expression and freedom of religion in the context of the abortion debate?

Background

In R v Skinner [2026] EWCR 4, Mr Skinner was a devout Christian strongly opposed to abortion. He sent two identical letters, attached to e-mails, to Temporary Inspector Fern Graham of the Dorset Police and to the Office of the Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner (which was opened by a female office administrator) headed “Reporting mass murder in Ophir Road” – a reference to the British Pregnancy Advisory Service’s clinic in Ophir Road, Bournemouth, which offers pregnancy termination. The letters included what were said to be photographs of aborted foetuses and comments about “brutal killings taking place in Bournemouth” and “terror and torture” suffered by foetuses in the process of termination [1-4]. (He also sent them to the Chief Constable and to local councillors, but those were not the subject of a criminal complaint [7].) He was convicted in respect of the e-mails to Inspector Graham and the Police and Crime Commissioner for improper use of the public electronic communications network, contrary to s.127(1) of the Communications Act 2003 [9 & 10]. He appealed.

The law

Saini J noted that the Divisional Court had recently set out the scope of s.127(1) and its interaction with the ECHR at para [111] of Cobban & Anor v Director of Public Prosecutions [2024] EWHC 1908 (Admin) at [12]. In summary [17]: Continue reading →