It was announced yesterday (January 23rd) by Home Office minister, Norman Baker, that plans to replace anti-social behaviour orders (Asbos) with injunctions to prevent “nuisance and annoyance” (Ipnas) have been abandoned after a huge defeat in the House of Lords earlier this month.
Peers voted against the Government by 306 to 178 to back an amendment to the Antisocial, Crime and Policing Bill tabled by Lord Dear, a former Chief Constable, who pointed out that innocent activities such as carol singing could have been criminalised by it and that, as it stood, anyone aged over 10 could be served with an Ipna, which could last for an indefinite period of time and even lead to a prison sentence if breached.
Under the original Government proposals, courts could impose injunctions on anyone engaging, or threatening to engage, in “conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person”.
This move outraged campaigners and lobbying groups, who claimed that it could criminalise any “nuisance or annoying behaviour” in the streets, such as peaceful protest, bellringers or street preachers.
Mr Baker said that he would table amendments next Monday that would restore the original Asbo test, under which “harassment, alarm or distress” must be caused before a court can grant an injunction.
However, he added that he still did not believe that the Ipnas would have led to carol singers or bellringers being banned and said it had never been the Government’s intention to prevent people exercising their freedom of speech or rights of protest.
Campaigners for freedom of speech, religious groups, police chiefs and other campaigners have welcomed the announcement, saying that no one should be subjected to legal sanctions simply for causing annoyance, while many felt that the law would have been exploited to silence the free expression of views some thought offensive or contrary to their own.