KEY POINTS:
Britain's most controversial four-letter word may soon be washing up on our shores. The acronym - anti-social behaviour order - a catch-all term for hooning, drunkenness, out-of-control youth, petty crime, unruly neighbours, intimidation and other acts of boorishness, is under investigation by our Minister of Police as a
means to deal with all of the above.
The closest thing we have to ASBOs in New Zealand are proposals to ban certain individuals from two central business districts. But as the "keep out" plans run into legislative and human rights roadblocks, the prospect looms of the ASBO - civil sanctions that can ban individuals from entering certain areas or carrying out specific acts.
Despite the problems, Rotorua is pushing ahead with its Community Safety Orders Bill which mayor Kevin Winters hopes to have before parliament soon - a necessary step because the district council found it was unable to pass a bylaw requested by the area's police to stop recidivist criminals from entering Rotorua's CBD.
"We found we couldn't give those powers to the police to do that because of human rights issues - that it was contrary to the Bill of Rights and various other laws."
Undeterred, Winters took his concerns to Minister of Police Annette King who suggested ASBOs as a way forward. He is now working with police, legal advisers and local MP Steve Chadwick on the bill while awaiting further advice from King's office which is researching the British system.
"We've modelled our community safety orders on [Britain's] ASBOs," says Winters.
As to whether it's fair to ban those who have repeatedly committed criminal offences from setting foot in Rotorua's town centre, Winters defers human rights issues to parliamentary debate when the local members bill is introduced.
It's a debate that has already been aired over the Manukau City Council Control of Graffiti Bill which seeks to prohibit the sale of spray paint to minors - something the select committee considering the bill was advised unfairly discriminates against young people buying paint for a lawful purpose.
There's a similar problem with another bill about to land on King's table. This results from the Wanganui District Council's resolve to create a bylaw to ban gang regalia and colours from Wanganui's CBD and other public places. Once again Bill of Rights issues arise - especially for those wearing gang patches - but not breaking any law.
"The proposed ban will simply turn our cops into Fashion Police, but won't stop the majority of gang violence that happens in our towns," said Green MP Metiria Turei in March. "Patch wearers may be more visible but what about skinhead gangs whose insignia is a shaved head and steel capped boots?"
As well as human rights hurdles, the problem facing Government is the prospect of a patchwork of legislation that ineffectively deals with national problems. Restricting the sale of spray paint in Manukau doesn't stop dedicated taggers from buying the tools of their trade across city boundaries. No gang colours in Wanganui doesn't stop their display in other areas. Repeat offenders may be exiled from Rotorua's township but what's to stop them visiting other towns? And while street racing may be largely under control in Manukau thanks to its bans on cars in some streets at set times, boy racers always seems to find another road somewhere else.
Enter the ASBO. Anti-social behaviour orders, which were introduced in Britain in 1998, are not criminal penalties. They are civil orders, made in civil proceedings intended to prohibit anyone aged 10 and older from continuing specified anti-social acts or entering defined locations.
ASBOs are handled by police and local authorities and put in place by a magistrate. They commonly include bans on causing harassment, alarm or distress, and may involve exclusion zones from particular places or shops, and bans on specific acts such as swearing in public or mixing with named individuals. Breaches of the orders are punishable by up to five years in prison.
Perhaps their most controversial aspect is that child or teenage offenders, usually protected by law from being named, can be identified so the community knows about the order imposed. The naming-and-shaming tactics have been criticised for taking away the child's right to privacy, but have gained support from residents sick of hiding in their own homes.
But there is evidence the issuing of ASBOs by the courts, described by some as a "geographical lottery", has been inconsistent. There are concerns too that the orders have been used on people with mental health problems where treatment would be more appropriate.
Because ASBOs are heard in civil courts, complaints do not have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, merely judged on the balance of probability. Hearsay evidence is also admissible, leading to disquiet about anonymous tip-offs and witch hunts.
There is criticism also of casting the net too wide in defining anti-social behaviour - resulting in orders bordering on the ridiculous. A 23-year-old woman who repeatedly threw herself into the Avon was banned from jumping into rivers or canals. A man with mental health problems was banned from sniffing petrol anywhere in Teesside. A 13-year-old was forbidden to use the word "grass". A 17-year-old was forbidden to use his front door. Then there was the evangelical preacher banned from London's Oxford Circus, the football-mad teenager told to stop kicking a ball in the street, and the neighbour prevented from playing Dido albums over and over again.
One woman was given an ASBO requiring her not to be seen wearing her underwear at her window or in her garden. An article in the Guardian quipped: "The local ASBO unit handed out diaries to her neighbours to record when she was seen in her underwear, giving a new meaning to neighbourhood watch."
Nationwide figures suggest that more than 55 per cent of orders are breached and a hard core of 20 per cent will breach them more than five times. About half of those who breach orders end up in custody for behaviour that was not imprisonable of itself.
There's overwhelming evidence that children are the main focus of ASBOs, leading to concerns the scheme encourages labelling and criminalisation of young people. Four in 10 ASBOs are served on people aged under 17.
Professor Rod Morgan, chairman of the English Youth Justice Board said last year: "There are adverse consequences of fixing a mark of Cain to a child's forehead."
Research shows that many young people had no clear understanding of the detailed restrictions in their orders and it wasn't unusual for them to openly flout the curbs. For some, ASBOs functioned as a "badge of honour' to boast about.
Mayors in the Auckland region are non-committal about a similar system here. "I have an open mind on that because at the end of the day I'm a strong believer in disciplining young people," says Manukau City Mayor Sir Barry Curtis.
"I don't want the people of Manukau to tolerate the kind of anti-social behaviour that has developed from time to time."
But he's quick to point out that 99 per cent of the 140,000 under-25s in Manukau are wonderful young people.
Sir Barry favours strengthening existing laws particularly in the area of graffiti control to deal with anti-social behaviour. He cites the city's successful use of liquor and street racing bylaws as the way forward.
"Strengthen the law, put deterrents in place so that these young people [the small minority] know the authorities mean business. They've got to learn that if they misbehave and conduct irresponsible activities in public places, they've got to pay the penalty."
Waitakere City Mayor Bob Harvey is doubtful about ASBOs. "I think you have to be very careful. Don't throw petrol on the fire."
Like Sir Barry he's concerned about graffiti and sees a minority as responsible for anti-social behaviour.
For the majority in his city, Harvey's message is one of dialogue. "Understand your community and understand the reasons for crime and the situations of young people - they are infinitely redeemable." And for the other 1 per cent?"You get tough with them. I don't think counselling works. I think the slammer does."
Auckland City Mayor Dick Hubbard is similarly hardline, describing boy racers as another form of "gangism" and reversing Bill of Rights concerns. "People have a right not to be killed, not to be burgled or be on the receiving end of crimes associated with financing cars."
Meanwhile back in Rotorua, Winters is determined to make his ASBO-like bylaw work. "The police know their names. We have CCTVs and they can see them coming into town. They know they're up to no good, but can't do anything until they've committed a crime."
His plan is that those who have had five convictions for dishonesty-related crimes in the past five years, will be, on their sixth offence, told to keep out of town or face a $1000 fine.
Will it work? "If you look at the crime triangle, it's about opportunity, offender and victim. If you take the opportunity away from the offender, you break the cycle."
