Teenager wins curfew challenge
The government has today suffered a major setback to its anti-social behaviour agenda after a teenager won a high court challenge against a child curfew zone.
The 15-year-old boy, known as “W” for legal reasons, said the use of dispersal zones in Richmond, south-west London, breached his rights under the European convention on human rights.
Unaccompanied under-16s found in zones after 21:00 BST can be held and escorted home, whether badly behaved or not. The police and Richmond borough council argued that these zones reduced anti-social behaviour.
However, the high court today ruled that the law did not give the police a power of arrest and officers could therefore not compel someone to come with them.
“All of us have the right to walk the streets without interference from police constables or CSOs [community support officers] unless they possess common law or statutory powers to stop us,” said Lord Justice Brooke.
In a statement made after the ruling, ‘W’ said: “Of course I have no problem with being stopped by the police if I’ve done something wrong.
“But they shouldn’t be allowed to treat me like a criminal just because I’m under 16.”
Shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve said the decision was yet another example of government legislation that is “poorly drafted and has unintended consequences”.
“The absence of the power of arrest to curfew orders makes the court’s judgment perfectly sensible,” he said.
“However, if a power of arrest had been attached, serious questions would have been asked about the potential for an unreasonable interference on the liberty of, for example, a 15-year-old on his own doing nothing wrong.
“The government must now address this issue and come up with a solution which will both protect communities form young yobs while reflecting the liberties of the law-abiding.”
James Welch, the legal director of civil rights organisation Liberty, welcomed today’s ruling and said young people should not be penalised just because they are young.
“People under the age of 16 have just as much right to go about their daily business as anybody else, and if they are not doing anything wrong, they shouldn’t be interfered with,” he told World at One.
