Liberty’s concerns over ASBOs are clear. They can dangerously blur the distinction between serious criminal activity and mere nuisance. They’re also open to inappropriate use; often fast-tracking people into prison rather than keeping them out.
ASBOs have now been with us for well over a decade. The experience of the last 13 years – and accompanying statistics – adds further weight to our reservations.
The breach rate is staggeringly high; rising from 40 per cent in 2003 to 56 per cent by 2009. Many who breach their order – often kids – end up within the criminal justice system and, all too regularly, in custody.
In 2009, 1,671 ASBOs were issued and 1,133 were breached for the first time. 501 of those issued were to children aged between 10 and 17. 1,332 youngsters in this age group received a custodial sentence for breaching their order between June 2000 and December 2009.
This disturbing breach rate – and the custodial consequences for children – underlines the weaknesses of this policy. The supposed aim of ASBOs – to address the misery caused by harassment and intimidation in communities – is admirable, but the approach simply isn’t working.
Examples of farcical ASBOs are common. In 2010, a Loch Ness man appeared in court for breaching an ASBO banning him from laughing, staring or slow-clapping. In 2004, a 13-year-old girl was barred from using the word ‘grass’ anywhere in England and Wales.
The Government gave us hope when the Home Secretary promised a review of ASBOs in July 2010. Sadly the resulting Home Office consultation appears confused.
While acknowledging the alarming statistics about the current regime’s failures, the consultation paper lacks any genuine new thinking. Instead it is preoccupied with the system’s so-called bureaucracy and centralisation, rather than its unfairness. The impression given is that ABSOs have been an almost unqualified success, and could benefit from being even easier to obtain.
The Government suggests a ‘simpler system’; less specific orders with tougher requirements covering wider categories of behaviour. While there would no longer be a criminal sanction for breach the consequences would still include imprisonment, fines and more. Worryingly, the Government also proposes that existing safeguards will be fewer in number.
Reform in this area is vital, but not reform like this. The likely result is more breaches and more children ending up behind bars for years to come.
