Recommendations & Conclusions
12 items
8
Conclusion
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
The respect order resurrects the direct criminal consequences of the ASBO while retaining the lesser procedural protections of the anti-social behaviour injunction. While it is important that anti-social behaviour is addressed, this should not come at the cost of procedural fairness. An unfair process inevitably risks respect orders being imposed …
Government response. The government rejects concerns regarding the procedural fairness of Respect Orders, asserting that the process is ECHR compliant due to existing safeguards, judicial oversight, and the preventative nature of the orders.
Ministry of Justice
9
Conclusion
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
Taking into account the proceedings as a whole, we have concerns about their compliance with principles of procedural fairness and Article 6 ECHR (the right to a fair trial). This is particularly the case given that respect orders would be available where anti-social behaviour, or even just the threat of …
Government response. The government rejects the concerns about Respect Order compliance with Article 6 ECHR, stating it is satisfied with existing safeguards that balance protecting rights and tackling anti-social behaviour.
Ministry of Justice
10
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
As part of the review we have proposed into the use of respect orders and their compliance with human rights standards, the Government should keep both the test for imposing a respect order and the standard of proof under careful review. (Conclusion, Paragraph 73)
Government response. The government rejected the recommendation to keep the test and standard of proof for Respect Orders under careful review, stating it is already satisfied the procedure is ECHR compliant and strikes the right balance due to existing safeguards and judicial …
Ministry of Justice
13
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
The Government should conduct an urgent review of the use of community protection notices and public spaces protection orders, and particularly the use of fixed penalty notices for breach, to determine their efficacy and whether they are being applied and enforced proportionately and with due regard to the circumstances, including …
Government response. The government does not commit to an urgent review of Community Protection Notices and Public Spaces Protection Orders, stating it is satisfied that existing provisions strike the right balance in tackling anti-social behaviour.
Ministry of Justice
17
Conclusion
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
Under the Bill, the power to designate an area within which it would be a criminal offence to conceal one’s identity depends on the police having a reasonable belief that a public procession or assembly “which constitutes a protest” is taking or may take place. There is no definition of …
Government response. The government rejected the implied recommendation to define "protest," stating it is unnecessary and unhelpful to depart from existing legislation, as the ordinary meaning is clear and its application will be decided by police and courts proportionately.
Ministry of Justice
18
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
To improve accessibility and foreseeability, the Bill should be amended to include a definition of “protest” or alternatively the need for the procession or assembly to constitute a protest should be removed. Removing this requirement would, however, widen the reach of the offence and should be accompanied by further changes …
Government response. The government rejects the recommendation, stating it does not consider it necessary or appropriate to define 'protest' or remove the protest requirement, as this would broaden the designation remit beyond its policy rationale.
Ministry of Justice
19
Conclusion
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
We recognise that the wearing of masks at protests can be intimidating, and that concealing identity can be used as a method of evading criminal responsibility. Nevertheless, the law must provide adequate protection against the unjustified criminalisation of peaceful protesters. (Conclusion, Paragraph 132)
Government response. The government acknowledges the right to peaceful protest but defends the new measures against face coverings, stating they are necessary to address the use of masks to evade criminal responsibility during disorderly protests and will be exercised proportionately.
Ministry of Justice
20
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
To achieve this, steps should be taken to provide additional safeguards for Convention rights: a. The Bill should be amended so that the police can only designate an area within which it would be a criminal offence to conceal one’s identity if they reasonably believe that offences involving violence or …
Government response. The government rejected the proposed Bill amendments, arguing that the designation power is already constrained by the likelihood of "commission of offences" and existing legislation provides a defence for health, religious, or work-related reasons. They committed to issuing operational guidance …
Ministry of Justice
22
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
To help ensure the right balance is struck between the right to protest and the rights of people to worship without intimidation, the Bill should be amended so that the police can impose conditions when they reasonably believe that an assembly or procession “would intimidate persons of reasonable firmness” rather …
Government response. The government rejects the recommendation to change the threshold from 'may intimidate' to 'would intimidate', stating that 'may intimidate' is appropriate and proportionate and that raising the threshold could unduly limit police ability to respond to risks.
Ministry of Justice
23
Conclusion
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
We welcome the introduction of mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse, which represents an important step forward for protection of children’s human rights. However, we are concerned that the scope of the duty and particularly the consequences of breach may not do enough to provide effective protection against child sexual …
Government response. The government rejects the concern that current consequences for failing to report child sexual abuse are insufficient, explaining that applying criminal sanctions could create a negative culture and instead highlights referrals to the DBS and professional regulators as effective measures.
Ministry of Justice
24
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
The Government must keep under review the efficacy of the mandatory reporting duty once it is in place, with a view to expanding its scope if necessary. The Government should also reconsider the consequence of failing to comply with the duty to report child sexual abuse, so that it operates …
Government response. The government rejected the use of criminal sanctions for failure to report child sexual abuse, opting instead for referral to DBS and professional regulators, and stated that a new criminal offence will target those who prevent reports. It also stated …
Ministry of Justice
25
Recommendation
5th Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Crim…
Rejected
We repeat our call for barriers to the exercise of universal jurisdiction to be removed, and our proposed amendment to the Bill to achieve this appears in the Annex to this report. (Recommendation, Paragraph 167) 59
Government response. The government rejected the recommendation to remove barriers to universal jurisdiction and amend the Bill, stating that its current approach focuses on specific crimes, supports prosecution closest to perpetration, and relies on the International Criminal Court for broader cases.
Ministry of Justice