Skip to content or view screen version

Teenager to fight 'anti-yob' laws

cat-weazel | 26.05.2005 01:18

An "upstanding" teenager who is subject to a town centre curfew is to challenge anti-social behaviour laws in court.



The 15-year-old will say a "dispersal zone" in Richmond, London, where police can remove all under-16s from the area after 9pm, infringes his human rights.

The youth, backed by campaign group Liberty, is taking Richmond Council and the Met police to London's High Court.

The police say the powers are only used on troublemakers. The council says the zones do reduce anti-social behaviour.

The right to create dispersal zones was given to police and local authorities by Labour's 2003 Anti-Social Behaviour Act.

Under-16s can be forcibly returned to their homes by police if they are on the streets unaccompanied by an adult between nine at night and six in the morning.

Liberty's legal director James Welch said the laws attack all children, not just the badly behaved.

"No-one objects to reasonable sanctions for bad behaviour but these powers fail to distinguish between the innocent and the guilty," he said.

'Important contribution'

The teenager, who is known as 'W' for legal reasons, said he had no problem with the police stopping people for bad behaviour.

He added: "But they shouldn't be allowed to treat me like a criminal just because I'm under 16."

Richmond Council, in conjunction with the Met police, has used the measure in three areas - Ham, Twickenham and Richmond centre - since the act came into force.

A council spokesman said the zones had made an "important contribution" to reducing anti-social behaviour in town centres.

"We very much hope the judge will uphold their continued use. This is an important test case which will have repercussions nationwide," he said.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4580305.stm

cat-weazel

Comments

Hide the following 6 comments

Don't believe the hype!

26.05.2005 09:37

We have had an increase in police numbers, community support officers, CCTV cameras, every three yards, neighbourhood watch, stop and search, dispersal zones, ASBO's and the introduction of tasers, therefore, if these excessive measures work, crime should be reduced to almost zero.

Police will have to resort to helping old ladies cross the street and giving directions, because they are practicaly redundant. Which is why they have invented new crimes, like "being outside" or "wearing hoods" and "smoking." This is in preparation for criminalising dissent.

Random and sporadic acts of violence are nothing new, it's human nature, there will always be real criminals to catch, but our youth are being stigmatized and victimised because they are bored, remember, cut-backs meant the closure of their clubs.

Children were evicted onto street corners, near crack houses, where they can be dispersed by police if they gather in groups of more than two! The laws recently re-enacted by Parliament were outlawed and repealed in the Middle Ages, for being inhumane.

The Police State is out of control.

Yobette


Human nature?

26.05.2005 15:48

"Random and sporadic acts of violence are nothing new, it's human nature"

So having not been prone to 'sporadic acts of violence' during my 32 years does this mean I am not human or not natural?

Oi!


Oi, no!

26.05.2005 17:39

It means you are bourgeois.

Maximillian


wtf?

27.05.2005 00:26

wtf?

Oi!


Correction

27.05.2005 09:12

Violence is an aberrant aspect of human nature, which the majority of normal youths are not prone to and yet, they are being treated as such simply for 'hanging out.' If people are intimidated by hats and hoods, then they ought to get a fucking grip. Irrational fears are a form of psychosis. The real danger to society is sitting in Parliament.

Yobette


enemies within

27.05.2005 11:05

Youth cover their heads.. Muslims cover their heads.. coincidence? or conspiracy?

ban religion and youth