The member of the Scottish Parliament who sponsored a law banning pro-life activities near facilities where abortions take place is supporting the arrest of a 74-year-old woman who held a pro-life sign in Glasgow last week.

Rose Docherty, 74, was arrested outside Queen Elizabeth University Hospital while holding a white sign with black letters stating, “Coercion is a crime; here to talk, only if you want,” according to a video published by the Scottish Family Party, a socially conservative political party that does not have any seats in the Scottish Parliament.

Docherty was standing alone and not saying anything aloud when police approached her.

Gillian Mackay, a Green Party member credited with authoring the “Safe Access Zones” bill that took effect in September 2024, told an interviewer that she hopes the arrest sends a message about what activities aren’t acceptable near abortion sites.

“Without wanting to comment on a live case, because I don’t think it’s responsible for MSPs to do so, I hope that the action the police has taken has given people who would be going to hospitals and appointments the reassurance that any breaches of these zones is going to be taken seriously, and that their comfort and their privacy going to these appointments is really important,” Mackay said during an interview published Monday by Scotcast, a BBC news podcast.

The law Mackay wrote bans “influencing the decision of another person to access, provide, or facilitate the provision of abortion services at the protected premises” within 200 meters (about 656 feet) of such a facility.

A pro-life supporter of Docherty said the arrest was wrong.

“It’s clear that Rose was not breaking the law. She was not ‘influencing’ anyone, but rather standing peacefully, inviting conversation, should anyone wish to engage. Alongside many other Scots, I was appalled to see her handcuffed and arrested and was disappointed that MSPs did not speak out against this clear injustice,” Lois McLatchie Miller, senior legal communications officer of Alliance Defending Freedom International, which defends pro-lifers, told the Register by email.

Scotcast host Martin Geissler interviewed Mackay and McLatchie Miller separately for the podcast — because, he said, Mackay did not want to debate her pro-life counterpart.

“The footage of Rose Docherty being arrested last week shocked a lot of people. It has been seen far and wide,” Geissler said to Mackay while setting up a question about it.

He pressed Mackay about the law, asking if one person holding a sign on the pavement ought to be illegal.

“The sign is not the thing that got her arrested. I’m sure, because we don’t have a prescriptive list of behaviors within the act. It’s the effect of those behaviors,” Mackay responded. “So it requires someone to complain about them, which I’m sure somebody did in the case last week — and to find them intimidating and harassing, as well — which is why we’ve made it clear to patients and to staff what is and isn’t okay and that it is okay to report things that they don’t find okay within the zones.”

The bill, titled “Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones),” passed the Scottish Parliament in June 2024 by a vote of 118-1. It took effect Sept. 24, 2024.

The Scottish government lists on a webpage several activities that might violate the law, including “silent vigils,” “handing out leaflets,” “religious preaching” and “approaching someone to try and persuade them not to access abortion services.”

U.S. Vice President JD Vance drew international attention to Scotland’s abortion-buffer-zones law when he criticized it during a speech Feb. 14 at the Munich Security Conference, as the Register reported last week.

Vance noted that the Scottish government this past fall sent letters to people whose houses are within the 200-meter zone — in his words, “warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law.”

Supporters of the law said Vance’s statement is wrong, noting that the letters don’t mention prayer.

But the Scotcast interviewer suggested private prayer might fall within the language of the letter, which warns residents that “activities in a private place (such as a house) within the area between the protected premises and the boundary of a zone could be an offense if they can be seen or heard within the zone and are done intentionally or recklessly.”

“I mean, it’s stretching it, but it’s not wrong, is it?” Geissler asked, referring to Vance’s suggestion that the letter covers “even private prayer.”

“It’s absolute nonsense,” Mackay responded, adding that the law doesn’t ban prayer.

The Scotcast interviewer asked if “performative prayer” at a window might violate the law.

“That then depends on who’s passing the window and whether anybody can,” Mackay said, before being interrupted by another question.

The Register contacted Mackay on Wednesday seeking clarification on that point, but could not immediately reach her.