header-logo header-logo

10 January 2008 / Jill Lorimer
Issue: 7303 / Categories: Features , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Super ASBOs

A new crime fighting tool or unjustifiable incursion of liberty? asks Jill Lorimer

Serious crime prevention orders (SCPOs) were introduced in the Serious Crime Act 2007 (SCA 2007), Pt 1 on 30 October 2007. Dubbed “super ASBOs” by the media, these are civil orders which may be made independently of criminal proceedings against those suspected of involvement in serious crime. The orders will impose binding conditions restricting the activities of individuals or organisations. The aim is to prevent the commission of serious crime but there is widespread concern that any benefits will be at the cost of a significant invasion of liberty and that there are insufficient safeguards to prevent injustice.

 

SCPOs may be made by the High Court, upon the application of the director of public prosecutions, the director of revenue and customs prosecutions or the director of the Serious Fraud Office. Equally, they may be made by the crown court in respect of a person who has either been convicted of an offence in the crown court, or committed to the crown

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll