Abstract
This paper provides an analysis of the introduction and implementation of hybrid powers to regulate anti-social behaviour, during a period of regulatory ‘hyperactivity’ in the UK. It explores the role of procedural justice by drawing on findings from a study conducted in England which investigated the implementation practices and experiences of young people and parents. These are considered against seven characteristics of procedural justice: voice; voluntariness; respectful treatment; parsimony; accuracy of information; fairness; and neutrality. The paper analyses the manner in which principles of voluntary cooperation can be corrupted by threats of punitive sanctions. It questions the extent to which the use of such hybrid orders fosters perceptions of legitimacy and supports the capacity of young people to avoid criminalisation.
Highlights
Concerns about youth behaviour are by no means new (Pearson 1983)
Most anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) were issued on conviction (CRASBO) for a criminal offence (60 %; 14,776) rather than as preventative stand-alone civil orders
In addition to the introduction of the ASBO and CRASBO, this included an array of nonstatutory innovations, such as the use of formal warnings and acceptable behaviour contracts (ABCs)
Summary
Concerns about youth behaviour are by no means new (Pearson 1983). Over recent decades, they have prompted intense political debate and policy reform, heralding the introduction of an array of measures to tackle low-level behavioural problems and prevent their escalation. The new hybrid tools represent a direct challenge to, and in some cases an assault upon, traditional conceptions of criminal justice. They frequently undermine established legal principles of due process, proportionality and special protections afforded to young people. This paper, by contrast, explores the legitimacy of the hybrid powers from the perspective of those subordinate groups who are subject to them It provides an overview and analysis of the introduction and implementation of various regulatory tools to regulate ASB, drawing on an empirical study conducted between 2008 and 2012, in England. To situate the research findings in a broader context, we begin with an overview and analysis of the politics that informed the regulatory innovations and their implementation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
