[daniel_williams]

B85 - Repeal of Anti-Social Behaviour Order Legislation, Conservative

"Repeal of Anti-Social Behaviour Order Legislation"

Background

1) Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) are civil orders made against a person who has proven to act in an 'anti-social" fashion.

2) A typical ASBO will tell the offender how and how not to behave; with risks of court action if the terms are breached.

3) ASBOs criminalise behaviour that is otherwise considered to be well within the law.

4) ASBOs seriously breach human rights as the recipient is punished before committing a crime.

5) The order penalties are very open-ended - this is a cause for concern as there are little restrictions on what can be considered as "anti-social behaviour".

6) At the current moment in time, 40% of ASBOs are breached with very little resulting punishment, rendering them near to useless.

7) Amongst the young, ASBOs are considered to be a "badge of honour" - which in itself promotes more "anti-social" behaviour.


BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-


1) All sections of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 and any other legislation referring to ASBOs shall be repealed with immediate effect.

2) All active ASBOs shall be immediately revoked, and all prosecutions regarding ASBOs shall be dropped.

3) All cases in which a prison sentence is currently being served for breach of an ASBO will be reviewed by the Home Office.

[UniOfLife]

For those who are interested, it is Section 3 that has changed.

[Alasdair]

Is there a procedure to review those cases where an ASBO was given as opposed to a criminal conviction?

[UniOfLife]

(Original post by Alasdair)
Is there a procedure to review those cases where an ASBO was given as opposed to a criminal conviction?

That's what Section 3 is for. Do you mean cases where an ASBO was given for an act which might otherwise have had a criminal conviction?

If so, then no. An ASBO is a civil case not a criminal case and the conditions in the ASBO may only specify legal acts not illegal ones. So an ASBO is very unlikely to be used in a situation where a criminal conviction could have been sought and certainly cannot be given in place of a criminal conviction since the ASBO is not filed for in a criminal court.

Does that answer the question?

[Eru Iluvatar]

A question, how will this repeal deal with CRASBOs (or is the idea not to, as these are related to criminal legislation)?

[UniOfLife]

(Original post by Eru Iluvatar)
A question, how will this repeal deal with CRASBOs (or is the idea not to, as these are related to criminal legislation)?

There is essentially little difference between an ASBO and a CRASBO except that a CRASBO is given after a criminal conviction. Thus the Bill would repeal both.

[Eru Iluvatar]

(Original post by UniOfLife)
There is essentially little difference between an ASBO and a CRASBO except that a CRASBO is given after a criminal conviction. Thus the Bill would repeal both.

Okay. I meant more to do with actual sentencing, along the same lines as Alasdair's point. Because CRASBOs can be given as an alternative, to other sentences, or as a condition when sentencing, where an actual crime has been committed (rather than, with ASBOs, where no crime neccessarily is committed), don't these need to be dealt with slightly differently to ensure that criminals are not let off?

[UniOfLife]

(Original post by Eru Iluvatar)
Okay. I meant more to do with actual sentencing, along the same lines as Alasdair's point. Because CRASBOs can be given as an alternative, to other sentences, or as a condition when sentencing, where an actual crime has been committed (rather than, with ASBOs, where no crime neccessarily is committed), don't these need to be dealt with slightly differently to ensure that criminals are not let off?

The number of cases where a person will receive only a CRASBO as a result of a criminal conviction will be fairly small. And in such cases the judge has effectively chosen to give the person a warning rather than a prison sentence or some other punishment. So I don't see a problem of letting criminals off, since they were already "let off" by the judge.

[daniel_williams]

Division! Clear lobbies