An anti-social behaviour order (ASBO ) is a civil order made in the United Kingdom against a person who had been shown, on the balance of evidence, to have engaged in anti-social behaviour. The orders were introduced by Prime Minister Tony Blair in 1998, and continued in use until abolished in England and Wales by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 on 20 October 2014although they continue to be used in Scotland and Northern Ireland. ASBOs were replaced in England and Wales by the civil injunctions and criminal behaviour orders. They were designed to address behaviours like intimidation, drunkenness, and violence by individuals and families, using civil orders rather than criminal sanctions. The orders restricted behaviour in some way, such as prohibiting a return to a certain area or shop, or restricting public behaviours such as swearing or drinking alcohol. Many saw the ASBOs as connected with young delinquents.Youth Justice Board Study (2006) Conducted by NACRO, Solanki, Bateman, Boswell and Hill
History ASBOs were introduced in England, Scotland, and Wales through the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and in Northern Ireland by The Anti-social Behaviour (Northern Ireland) Order 2004. Later legislation strengthened its application: in England and Wales, this was largely via the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 and in Scotland with the Antisocial and Sexual Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004."Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004: Guidance on Antisocial Behaviour Orders", Scottish Executive. " " URLs. Retrieved 18 June 2007. Scotland, however, had a pre-existing tribunal system charged with dealing with children and young persons who offend, the Children's Hearings system.
In a press release of 28 October 2004, Tony Blair and David Blunkett announced further measures to extend the use and definition of ASBOs."Press Briefing: 3.45pm Thursday 28 October 2004 ", 10 Downing Street. Retrieved 18 June 2006. The remit included: Extension of the Witness Protection Programme in anti-social behaviour cases More courts dealing with cases More offences, including dog-fouling, litter, graffiti, and night-time noise liable for fixed penalty notices Giving parish councils the power to issue fixed penalty notices for infringements
The press release concluded by remarking:
On 25 October 2005, Transport for London announced its intent to apply for a new law giving them the authority to issue orders against repeat fare dodgers, and increased fines.Plans for £50 fare-dodger fines, BBC News, 25 October 2005. Retrieved 18 June 2006. By 31 March 2004, 2,455 ASBOs had been issued in England and Wales. On 30 March 2006, the Home Office announced that 7,356 ASBOs had been given out since 1999 in England and Wales."Asbo total hits 7,356", The Register, 30 March 2006. Retrieved 18 June 2006.
Replacement
The 2010 coalition government expressed its intention to replace ASBOs, citing the reasons that "breach rates are high, and the number issued has been steadily declining since 2005." In July 2010, Home Secretary Theresa May announced her intention to reform anti-social behaviour measures for England and Wales, with the abolition of ASBOs in due course in favour of alternative "community-based" social control policies. However, in 2012, Liberal Democrat objections prevented the implementation of proposals in a Home Office White Paper to replace the ASBO with a "criminal behaviour order" and a "crime prevention injunction". In May 2013, an Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill was introduced into the House of Commons, including a provision to create "injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance", replacing ASBOs in England and Wales. The bill was criticised for the broad and undefined scope of "nuisance and annoyance", and was rejected by the House of Lords in January 2014.
The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 received Royal Assent in March 2014. This streamlined the tools available to tackle anti-social behaviour, and replaced the ASBO with an injunction (a civil order) and a criminal behaviour order (CBO) in England and Wales.
What warrants an ASBO
Uses
An ASBO can be issued in response to "conduct which caused or was likely to cause harm, harassment, alarm, or distress, to one or more persons not of the same household as him or herself, and where an ASBO is seen as necessary to protect relevant persons from further anti-social acts by the defendant.""Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s.1(1)", Office of Public Sector Information. Retrieved 18 June 2006. In England and Wales, they were issued by magistrates' courts; they are issued in Scotland by the sheriff courts and in Northern Ireland by magistrates' courts.
The British government introduced ASBOs through the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. In the UK, a CRASBO was a "criminally related" ASBO. One local authority published photos of those given ASBOs on an Internet site. Anti-social behaviour included a range of behaviours, such as:Home Affairs – Written Evidence: 19. Memorandum submitted by Napo, House of Commons, 22 March 2005. Retrieved 18 June 2006. abandoning cars arson begging casteism dangerous driving defecating/urinating in public disturbing the peace dogging (exhibitionistic public sex) drug dealing/consumption of controlled recreational drugs drunken behaviour fare evasion intimidation littering/fly tipping/dog fouling loitering (with intent) noise pollution paedophilic activity racism and xenophobia rioting rudeness spitting stealing/mugging/shoplifting urban exploration vandalism/criminal damage/graffiti
Standard of proof Applications for ASBOs were heard by magistrates sitting in their civil capacity. Although the proceedings were civil, the court had to apply a heightened civil standard of proof. This standard was virtually indistinguishable from the criminal standard. The applicant had to satisfy the court "so that it is sure" that the defendant has acted in an anti-social manner. The test for the court to be "satisfied so that it is sure" was the same direction that a judge gives to a jury in a criminal case heard in the Crown Court, and is also known as satisfying the court "beyond reasonable doubt".R v Kritz 1 KB 82 at 89, approved by the Privy Council in Walters v R 2 AC 26 at 30
Pursuant to section 1(1) Civil Evidence Act 1995, an applicant (and a defendant) had the right to rely on witness statements without calling the makers of those statements—known as hearsay. If a party proposed to rely upon a hearsay statement, then the other party was entitled to ask the court for permission to call that witness for cross-examination.Civil Evidence Act 1995 s.3; Magistrates' Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999, r.4
Section 4(1) Civil Evidence Act 1995 states that:
The High Court has emphasised that the use of the words "if any" shows that some hearsay evidence may be given no weight at all. For an ASBO to be made, the applicant had to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the respondent had behaved in an anti-social manner. The applicant could rely on hearsay evidence. However, the Court of Appeal has stated that it does not expect a court to find that the criminal standard has been reached by relying solely on hearsay evidence. The Civil Evidence Act 1995 itself makes clear that courts should consider what weight, if any at all, it attaches to hearsay material. In Cleary, the Court of Appeal again restated that courts need to be cautious of hearsay evidence.
Typical ASBOs An ASBO was an order of the court which told an individual aged over 10 years how they must not behave.
An order could contain only negative prohibitions. It could not contain a positive obligation.Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s1(4) and 1(6); R (Lonergan) v. Crown Court at Lewes (2005) 2 All ER 362 To obtain an ASBO, a two-stage test had to be satisfied by the applicant authority (see: s.1(1) Crime and Disorder Act 1998). The first test was that the defendant had committed acts causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress within six months of the date of issue of the summons. The second test was that an order was necessary to protect persons from further anti-social behaviour.
The applicant had to satisfy the court that the individual had acted in an anti-social manner—that is to say, in a manner that caused, or was likely to cause, harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as themself.Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s1(a) A court could order an ASBO only if such an order was "necessary".Crime and Disorder Act 1988, s1(b) Further, each prohibited act would usually be an act preparatory to a criminal offence, rather than the offence itself—but not always (see: Rabess v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EWHC 208 (Admin)). In addition, each prohibition itself had to be necessary.
An order had to be tailored for the individual defendant. The ASBO represented "a form of personalised criminal law." It had to be relevant to the particular anti-social behaviour. Orders needed to be simple, precise and proportionate. Each prohibition had to be necessary.R v. Dean Boness EWCA Crim 2395 In R v Boness, stipulations regarding not harassing, causing alarm or distress to any person, and not carrying packaged, bagged or wrapped goods (except food), in public in certain circumstances, were struck down due to their lack of precision and complexity.
An ASBO was very similar to a civil injunction, even though the differences are important. First: the injunction was supposed to protect the world at large, in a given geographical area, rather than an individual. Second: breach of an ASBO was a criminal offence to be tried in a criminal court, applying the criminal standard of beyond all reasonable doubt. A power of committal to prison was available for breach of a civil injunction, but a court was unlikely to exercise that power. A person subject to an anti-social behaviour order where it did not follow a criminal conviction had an automatic right of appeal against both the making of the order and its terms to a higher court. There was also the availability of an appeal to the High Court by way of "case stated". There was no appeal against the variation of orders.
An application for an ASBO was considered by the courts in its civil jurisdiction, and was a civil order. However, breach of an ASBO was a criminal offence, and conviction could result in up to five years' imprisonment (two for a minor). Subsequent legislation compelled magistrates to make a Parenting Order, where a person under the age of 16 breached their ASBO.Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s.8A(2), inserted by Crime and Security Act 2010 s.41
Other examples: Begging"Cases of ASBOs used for general public order issues" Statewatch's ASBOWatch Flyposting"Top music chiefs are spared ASBOs". BBC News, 14 June 2004 Harassment Organising illegal raves"Man banned from organising raves" BBC News, 14 June 2006 Suicide attempts"Arrest of Asbo 'suicide' woman" BBC News, 27 February 2006 Theft"Asbo for youth who terrorised neighbours" Rochdale Observer, 16 March 2007, Helen Johnson Vandalism"TfL wins first Asbo against graffiti vandal" Wikinews, 25 September 2007"How ASBOs have worked" CrimeReduction.gov.uk, 6 September 2006
Uncommon ASBOs Unconventional uses of ASBOs, as listed by a report to the Home Office to illustrate the broad applicability of the civil order, include: Two teenage boys from east Manchester forbidden to wear one golf glove, as it was a symbol of membership of a particular gang. A 13-year-old forbidden to use the word "grass" as a term of abuse in order to threaten people. A 15-year-old forbidden to play football in his street. A farmer (the first to be given an ASBO) who was instructed to keep his geese and pigs from damaging his neighbour's property.