|
|
|
|
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
|
| |
|
| |
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c.33) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It introduced a number of changes to the existing law, most notably in the restriction and reduction of existing rights and in greater penalties for certain "anti-social" behaviours. The Bill was introduced by Michael Howard, home secretary of Prime Minister John Major's Conservative government, and attracted widespread opposition.
The whole of Part V which covered collective trespass and nuisance on land and included sections against raves (63-67, including the "repetitive beats" definition) and further sections against disruptive trespass, squatters, and unauthorised campers – most significantly the criminalisation of previously civil offences.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994' Start a new discussion about 'Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c.33) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It introduced a number of changes to the existing law, most notably in the restriction and reduction of existing rights and in greater penalties for certain "anti-social" behaviours. The Bill was introduced by Michael Howard, home secretary of Prime Minister John Major's Conservative government, and attracted widespread opposition.
Changes
Changes which received great public attention included:
- Sections 34-39, which substantially changed the right to silence of an accused person, allowing for inferences to be drawn from their silence.
- Sections 54-59, which gave the police greater rights to take and retain intimate body samples.
- Section 60, which increased police powers of unsupervised "stop and search".
The whole of Part V which covered collective trespass and nuisance on land and included sections against raves (63-67, including the "repetitive beats" definition) and further sections against disruptive trespass, squatters, and unauthorised campers – most significantly the criminalisation of previously civil offences. This affected many forms of protest including hunt sabotage and anti-road protests.
Part VII handled "Obscenity and Pornography", banning simulated child pornography, harshening provisions dealing with the censorship and age restriction of videos, and also increasing the penalty on obscene phone calls.
The act also reduced the age at which homosexual acts are lawful from 21 to 18, and altered the definition of rape to include anal rape of men.
Opposition
When the legislation was still under debate, the Advance Party coordinated a campaign of resistance against what was then the Criminal Justice Bill. The group was composed of an alliance of sound systems and civil liberties groups. Two demonstrations were organised in London on July 24 and October 9 1994. The latter took the form of a march which ended up as a party at Hyde Park.
Criticisms
Commentators have seen the Act as a draconian piece of legislation which was "explicitly aimed at suppressing the activities of certain strands of alternative culture", the main targets being squatting, direct action, hunt sabotage and the free party. The sections which specifically refer to parties or raves are seen as badly defined and drafted in an atmosphere of "clear moral panic" following the Castlemorton Common Festival.
In response to the proposed bill, UK electronica band Autechre released the three-track "Anti EP" on Warp Records, stating:
The fifth mix on the Internal version of Orbital's Are We Here? EP was titled "Criminal Justice Bill?". It consisted of about four minutes of silence. "Their Law", a song by The Prodigy and Pop Will Eat Itself, was written as a direct response to the bill. A quotation in the booklet of the Prodigy's album "Music for the Jilted Generation" read "How can the government stop young people having a good time? Fight this bollocks."
See also
- SchNEWS, a newspaper set up to describe and promote direct action campaigning against the proposition (whilst it was still a Bill), then subsequently in defiance of the Act.
External links
|
| |
|
|
