Lord Ouseley – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Ouseley on 2014-06-04.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the adequacy and effectiveness of sentencing in cases where football fans have been found guilty of racially or religiously aggravated public order offences; and whether they will consider providing advice to the magistracy in response to any evidence revealing that magistrates are reluctant to issue football banning orders in such cases.

Lord Faulks

Racially and religiously aggravated offences have no place in our society. Parliament has provided the courts with the necessary powers to deal effectively with those who are convicted of these serious offences. The court must make a football banning order where an offender has been convicted of a relevant offence and it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that making a banning order would help prevent violence or disorder at, or in connection with, any regulated football matches. If the court is not so satisfied, it must state that fact and give reasons in open court. The prosecution has a right of appeal against a failure by the court to make a banning order.

Relevant offences for these purposes include chanting of an indecent or racialist nature at a designated football match, and specified offences under the Public Order Act 1986 committed during a period relevant to a football match, which covers the period beginning two hours before the match and ending one hour after the match, at any premises while the offender was at, or entering or leaving or trying to enter or leave, the premises.

We are not aware of any evidence to suggest that the magistracy are reluctant to make football banning orders, and decisions of the magistrates are made with the assistance of legal advisers who refer to current sentencing guidelines.