Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

CHILDREN'S CHARITY ATTACKS USE OF SWEEPING ASBOs

  • Comment
A leading children's charity has accused councils of issuing unclear anti-social behaviour orders to children....
A leading children's charity has accused councils of issuing unclear anti-social behaviour orders to children.

Children's Society policy director Kathy Evans has claimed some ASBOs are 'subjective'. Her accusation comes as last week the high court said Manchester City Council should not have given a 13-year-old boy an ASBO that simply banned him from committing any sort of anti-social behaviour within its boundaries.

Lord Justice Richards upheld the order, but said its original version lacked specifics and so 'was incapable of being understood'.

Ms Evans has suggested other councils are also guilty of issuing vague orders. She said: 'We are very concerned about the subjective nature of ASBOs.

'If punishments are created, individuals must know clearly what behaviour will incur them, and it is not clear to children.'

Manchester's housing director Steve Rumbelow said that since the high court case arose last year the council had clarified that orders are applied to behaviour that 'causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress'.

The council recently attracted controversy after Home Office figures showed it had issued 391 orders, almost double that at any other council.

Martin Narey, chief executive of the children's charity Barnardos, said the figures proved that in some areas ASBO use had become routine and, 'is unnecessarily catapulting children into a custodial system [where] the chances of rehabilitation are extremely slim and the chances of deeper criminalisation very likely'.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.