Judge recuses himself from case of woman praying in censorship zones for “apparent bias”

Image credit: Christian Concern

A judge in Northern Ireland has recused himself from the case of a woman who is seeking to appeal her conviction for praying peacefully and holding a pro-life sign within a “safe access” zone, due to “apparent bias”.

Recusal is when a judge excuses himself or herself from a case because of a potential conflict of interest or lack of impartiality.

Back in October 2023, Claire Brennan became the first person arrested in Northern Ireland following the implementation of the “safe access” zones law, for reciting the Our Father prayer and holding a sign saying “Pray to End Abortion” around Causeway Hospital in Coleraine, which is within a zone.

However, in December last year, she was convicted of breaking the law and has since sought to appeal her conviction. 

According to Christian Concern, Brennan’s hearing for her appeal was heard on 2nd September this year, but afterwards, it was discovered that the judge assigned to the appeal, County Court Judge Ciaran Moynagh, has in the past been involved in abortion rights cases, as well as being awarded Humanist of the Year by Humanists UK for his activism in abortion and same-sex marriage rights.

Supported by Christian Legal Centre, Brennan filed a formal complaint which states that judges must recuse themselves if they could have a perceived bias based on their public activism. 

Last week, on 11th November, Judge Moynagh announced that he had recused himself from the case. 

In an official statement to the court, he said:

“[Mrs Brennan] had learnt that it was public knowledge that I had taken on high-profile abortion rights cases, stating that abortion reform was a high point in my career and had accepted an award for human rights activism and challenging the status quo on abortion. [Mrs Brennan] made a complaint to the Lord Chief Justice’s Office on the grounds of ‘apparent bias’ and said that I should have recused myself before the case was heard…”

“[Mrs Brennan] is correct that I have carried out litigation on the issues of abortion…” he confirmed, adding that whilst he did not believe he had any apparent bias, “in recognition of the importance of maintaining public confidence in the impartial administration of justice and to ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done, I have decided out of an abundance of caution to recuse myself from further involvement in this matter… the matter will now be re-listed again for the 27 November.”

Speaking on this Brennan said: “All I wanted was a fair trial. As soon as I discovered his past activism on abortion, I knew that this had to be exposed and that it was simply not right that he should be presiding over my case.”

“Every person deserves a fair trial, especially in a case as sensitive and significant as this. The public must have confidence that justice is being administered impartially, not influenced by extreme ideological views,” she continued. “I am calling for the highest level of scrutiny into Judge Moynagh’s involvement in my case. No one should be tried by a judge who has openly campaigned on the very issue at the heart of the proceedings.”

“I took a peaceful stand outside Causeway Hospital to pray for the unborn and to defend the freedom of Christians to express their faith in public. These censorship zones are a dangerous overreach that criminalise compassion and silence prayer. I am challenging this law not just for myself, but for the protection of the unborn and for the future of religious freedom in Northern Ireland.”

Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, Andrea Williams, said that a judge recusing  himself was "unprecedented" saying that “justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. Judicial impartiality is the bedrock of a fair society, and it is right that Judge Moynagh has now recused himself.”

“However, it is extraordinary and unprecedented for a judge to be recused in such circumstances. There must now be serious scrutiny of how this situation was allowed to arise. Given Judge Moynagh’s history of activism on abortion and LGBTQI issues, his fitness to serve when adjudicating on cases involving these issues must be urgently reviewed at the highest levels. He should never again preside over a case relating to abortion in Northern Ireland,” she added.

“The so-called ‘censorship zones’ represent a chilling attack on freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to peaceful protest. They criminalise compassion and silence dissent. The arrest of Claire Brennan for quietly praying the Lord’s Prayer should serve as a wake-up call for our nation.”

“The unborn are members of the human family, the most vulnerable among us, and good law must protect them. Since abortion laws changed in Northern Ireland, the number of unborn lives lost has surged.”

“We stand with Claire as she seeks justice, not only for herself, but for the unborn and for the fundamental freedoms of every citizen in the United Kingdom.”

Attacks towards pro-lifers for peaceful activism within censorship zones have been happening across the UK, with Isabel Vaughan-Spruce this year being investigated for a third time for praying silently in her head, after she was not only acquitted for the first two arrests that happened in 2022 and 2023, but was also awarded £13,000 and given an apology by the police. Rose Docherty in Scotland was also recently arrested for a second time for holding a sign saying “coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want” within a censorship zone, despite having the charges against her dropped for the first arrest. 

Sandra Parda of the Life Institute commented, saying: “This is a victory for free speech and justice. The judge may not feel he has bias, but his past support for abortion rights will heavily imply that his views and activism could influence how he views the case against Ms Brennan. He has done the right thing for the sake of justice and a fair trial.”

“Talking to people about their options is not a crime. Freedom of speech is not a crime. These censorship zones are not about protecting women, but about protecting abortion and ensuring that women do not get the opportunity to change their mind or avail of support offered by the pro-life community.”

“Free speech is under threat, more specifically if you hold a viewpoint that is open to love and compassion towards those in need. It’s about time people realised this and took a stand against this attack on our basic human rights.”