Preventive justice: Exploring the coercive power of community protection notices to tackle anti-social behaviour
| Author | Vicky Heap,Alex Black,Zoe Rodgers |
| Published date | 01 July 2022 |
| Date | 01 July 2022 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1462474521989801 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Preventive justice:
Exploring the coercive
power of community
protection notices
to tackle anti-social
behaviour
Vicky Heap , Alex Black and
Zoe Rodgers
Sheffield Hallam University, UK
Abstract
Community Protection Notices (CPNs) are civil preventive orders used in England and
Wales to prevent and/or require specific behaviour by an individual or organisation,
where existing conduct has a ‘detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the
locality’. Breach of the notice results in a £100 fine under a Fixed Penalty Notice or a
possible criminal conviction. To date, CPNs have tackled an array of perceived anti-
social behaviours, ranging from rough sleeping to overgrown gardens. Using Ashworth
and Zedner’s preventive justice as an analytical framework, our research qualitatively
explores recipients’ experiences of this new tool for the first time. The findings high-
light how the operationalisation of CPNs extends the coercive power of the state, with
a range of negative consequences relating to the concepts of disproportionality, due
process and accountability. We also offer three empirically-grounded recommendations
for reforming CPN practices.
Keywords
accountability, ASB, discretion, procedural safeguards, proportionality
Corresponding author:
Vicky Heap, Department of Law and Criminology, Sheffield HallamUniversity, Collegiate Campus, Collegiate
Crescent, Sheffield S10 2BQ, UK.
Email: V.Heap@shu.ac.uk
Punishment & Society
!The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1462474521989801
journals.sagepub.com/home/pun
2022, Vol. 24(3) 305–323
Introduction
A Community Protection Notice (CPN) is a civil behavioural notice that imposes
requirements on an individual aged over 16, or an organisation, to undertake or cease
specific actions or behaviours. According to Part 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour,
Crime and Policing Act (2014), any behaviour can be sanctioned by a CPN if ‘the
conduct of the individual or body is having a detrimental effect, of a persistent or
continuing nature, on the quality of life of those in the locality, and the conduct is
unreasonable’ (Section 43 (1)). The main differences between a CPN and previous
anti-social behaviour (ASB) powers are that the grounds for a CPN are vaguer and
more subjective than the legal ASB definition, with a significantly lower standard of
proof and can be issued without having to go to court. The limited information cur-
rently available about CPNs highlights an increasing, but widely divergent use. An
investigation by Mills and Ford (2018) suggests demographic profiles of recipients are
infrequently recorded by local councils and police services, offering little oversight of
the discretionary use of this power. We also know from our own research that the
Home Office does not monitor the use of any of the powers introduced through the
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, so there is no accountability or top-
down monitoring taking place (Heap and Dickinson, 2018).
To date, no empirical research has been conducted to examine how CPNs are
being experienced by recipients or used by practitioners. This paper begins to
address this gap in understanding by reporting the first, and to date only, research
into the experiences of CPN recipients. The aim was to investigate why, and most
importantly how, individuals come to receive a CPN. In particular, we were keen
to understand recipients’ perceptions of the behaviours sanctioned and their con-
text, recipients’ knowledge and experience of the issuing process and to assess if,
and in what ways, CPNs are being resisted or challenged.
Community Protection Notices
In England and Wales, ASB is legally defined as ‘conduct that has caused, or is
likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person’ (Anti-Social
Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, Section 2 (1a)). The Crime Survey for
England and Wales indicates that ASB is a pervasive problem, with 39.6% of
citizens experiencing or witnessing ASB and police recording 1.5 million ASB
incidents in 2019 (Office for National Statistics, 2020, 2019). Powers to tackle
ASB were first introduced by the New Labour government through the Crime
and Disorder Act (1998) as a means of addressing perceived inefficiencies with
the criminal justice system (Burney, 2005). This was followed by a tranche of
legislative measures including the Police Reform Act (2002) and Anti-Social
Behaviour Act (2003), which were designed to provide a holistic, community-
based approach to nuisance behaviour. In 2014, the Home Office introduced the
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act with a view to enhancing responses
to ASB victimisation by ‘streamlining’ existing powers. A key element of the new
306 Punishment & Society 24(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial