Public Order Act 2023
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
20 Serious disruption prevention order made on conviction
(1) This section applies where— (a) a person aged 18 or over (“P”) is convicted of an offence (“the current offence”) which was committed on or after the day on which this section comes into force, and (b) the prosecution applies for a serious disruption prevention order to be made in respect of P. (2) The court dealing with P in respect of the current offence may make a serious disruption prevention order in respect of P if— (a) the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the current offence is a protest-related offence (see section 32 (interpretation)), (b) the condition in subsection (3) is met, and (c) the court considers it necessary to make the order for a purpose mentioned in subsection (5). (3) The condition in this subsection is that the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that— (a) within the relevant period, P has— (i) committed another protest-related offence for which P was convicted, or (ii) committed a protest-related breach of an injunction (see section 32 (interpretation)) for which P was found in contempt of court, (b) the current offence and P’s conduct mentioned in paragraph (a)— (i) relate to different protests, or (ii) took place on different days, and (c) P’s conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) has not been taken into account when making any previous serious disruption prevention order in respect of P. (4) In subsection (3) “the relevant period” means the period of 5 years ending with the day on which P is convicted of the current offence; but P’s conduct may be taken into account for the purposes of this section only if it took place— (a) on or after the day on which this section comes into force, and (b) when P was aged 16 or over. (5) The purposes are— (a) to prevent P from committing a protest-related offence or a protest-related breach of an injunction; (b) to prevent P from carrying out activities related to a protest that result in, or are likely to result in, serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation, in England and Wales; (c) to prevent P from causing or contributing to— (i) the commission by any other person of a protest-related offence or a protest-related breach of an injunction, or (ii) the carrying out by any other person of activities related to a protest that result in, or are likely to result in, serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation, in England and Wales; (d) to protect two or more individuals, or an organisation, in England and Wales from the risk of serious disruption arising from— (i) a protest-related offence, (ii) a protest-related breach of an injunction, or (iii) activities related to a protest. (6) A serious disruption prevention order under this section is an order which, for a purpose mentioned in subsection (5)— (a) requires P to do anything described in the order; (b) prohibits P from doing anything described in the order. (7) The court may make a serious disruption prevention order in respect of P only if it is made in addition to— (a) a sentence imposed in respect of the current offence, or (b) an order discharging P conditionally. (8) For the purpose of deciding whether to make a serious disruption prevention order the court may consider evidence led by the prosecution or P. (9) It does not matter whether the evidence would have been admissible in the proceedings for the current offence. (10) The court may adjourn any proceedings on an application for a serious disruption prevention order even after sentencing P. (11) If P does not appear for any adjourned proceedings the court may— (a) further adjourn the proceedings, (b) issue a warrant for P’s arrest, or (c) hear the proceedings in P’s absence. (12) The court may not act under subsection (11)(b) unless it is satisfied that P has had adequate notice of the time and place of the adjourned proceedings. (13) The court may not act under subsection (11)(c) unless it is satisfied that P— (a) has had adequate notice of the time and place of the adjourned proceedings, and (b) has been informed that if P does not appear for those proceedings the court may hear the proceedings in P’s absence. (14) On making a serious disruption prevention order the court must in ordinary language explain to P the effects of the order. (15) Where an offence is found to have been committed over a period of 2 or more days, or at some time during a period of 2 or more days, it must be taken for the purposes of this section to have been committed on the last of those days.
20 Serious disruption prevention order made on conviction
(1) This section applies where— (a) a person aged 18 or over (“P”) is convicted of an offence (“the current offence”) which was committed on or after the day on which this section comes into force, and (b) the prosecution applies for a serious disruption prevention order to be made in respect of P. (2) The court dealing with P in respect of the current offence may make a serious disruption prevention order in respect of P if— (a) the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the current offence is a protest-related offence (see section 32 (interpretation)), (b) the condition in subsection (3) is met, and (c) the court considers it necessary to make the order for a purpose mentioned in subsection (5). (3) The condition in this subsection is that the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that— (a) within the relevant period, P has— (i) committed another protest-related offence for which P was convicted, or (ii) committed a protest-related breach of an injunction (see section 32 (interpretation)) for which P was found in contempt of court, (b) the current offence and P’s conduct mentioned in paragraph (a)— (i) relate to different protests, or (ii) took place on different days, and (c) P’s conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) has not been taken into account when making any previous serious disruption prevention order in respect of P. (4) In subsection (3) “the relevant period” means the period of 5 years ending with the day on which P is convicted of the current offence; but P’s conduct may be taken into account for the purposes of this section only if it took place— (a) on or after the day on which this section comes into force, and (b) when P was aged 16 or over. (5) The purposes are— (a) to prevent P from committing a protest-related offence or a protest-related breach of an injunction; (b) to prevent P from carrying out activities related to a protest that result in, or are likely to result in, serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation, in England and Wales; (c) to prevent P from causing or contributing to— (i) the commission by any other person of a protest-related offence or a protest-related breach of an injunction, or (ii) the carrying out by any other person of activities related to a protest that result in, or are likely to result in, serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation, in England and Wales; (d) to protect two or more individuals, or an organisation, in England and Wales from the risk of serious disruption arising from— (i) a protest-related offence, (ii) a protest-related breach of an injunction, or (iii) activities related to a protest. (6) A serious disruption prevention order under this section is an order which, for a purpose mentioned in subsection (5)— (a) requires P to do anything described in the order; (b) prohibits P from doing anything described in the order. (7) The court may make a serious disruption prevention order in respect of P only if it is made in addition to— (a) a sentence imposed in respect of the current offence, or (b) an order discharging P conditionally. (8) For the purpose of deciding whether to make a serious disruption prevention order the court may consider evidence led by the prosecution or P. (9) It does not matter whether the evidence would have been admissible in the proceedings for the current offence. (10) The court may adjourn any proceedings on an application for a serious disruption prevention order even after sentencing P. (11) If P does not appear for any adjourned proceedings the court may— (a) further adjourn the proceedings, (b) issue a warrant for P’s arrest, or (c) hear the proceedings in P’s absence. (12) The court may not act under subsection (11)(b) unless it is satisfied that P has had adequate notice of the time and place of the adjourned proceedings. (13) The court may not act under subsection (11)(c) unless it is satisfied that P— (a) has had adequate notice of the time and place of the adjourned proceedings, and (b) has been informed that if P does not appear for those proceedings the court may hear the proceedings in P’s absence. (14) On making a serious disruption prevention order the court must in ordinary language explain to P the effects of the order. (15) Where an offence is found to have been committed over a period of 2 or more days, or at some time during a period of 2 or more days, it must be taken for the purposes of this section to have been committed on the last of those days.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.