Section 50 UPDATE!

Ok, as we said in our previous post we would do a bit more digging on this section 50 of the police reform act. So during OPERATION SPREAD LOVE when the police requested our details under section 50, we asked had we caused an individual harassment, alarm or distress, the officer said "no", thinking we were referring to section 5 of the public order act.
The officer stated that by using the megaphone we had acted in an anti social manner and requested we give him our details or we would be arrested. The officer was then asked "what constituted anti social behaviour?". We were told that there was no legal definition of anti social behaviour. We then stated "so anyone could complain that anything was anti social and the police would have to act?" the officer replied "yes".

This is wrong, section 50 of the police reform act states:

Section 50

50 Persons acting in an anti-social manner
(1) If a constable in uniform has reason to believe that a person has been acting, or is acting,
in an anti-social manner (within the meaning of section 1 of the Crime and Disorder
Act 1998 (c. 37) (anti-social behaviour orders)), he may require that person to give his
name and address to the constable.
(2) Any person who—
(a) fails to give his name and address when required to do so under subsection (1),
or
(b) gives a false or inaccurate name or address in response to a requirement under
that subsection,
is guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding
level 3 on the standard scale.

(Note there is no requirement to give your date of birth)
As you can see there is a definition of anti-social behaviour contained within section 1 of the crime and disorder act, which states:

Section 1

Anti-social behaviour orders.
(1) An application for an order under this section may be made by a relevant authority if
it appears to the authority that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to any
person aged 10 or over, namely—
(a) that the person has acted, since the commencement date, in an anti-social
manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment,
alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself.

Which is the same definition as a breach of the peace as defined in section 5 of the public order act:

Section 5

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly
behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening,
abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress
thereby.

Basically if you haven't breached section 5 then they cannot request your details under section 50. We are therefore going to write a letter to Hampshire constabulary stating that the officers were wrong to use section 50 as they had already stated that we had not caused an individual harassment alarm or distress, that our details should be erased from the officers pocketbook and any other system that this information has been transferred to.

Please note that that is our personal interpretation of the legislation and that this in no way constitutes legal advice. We would love any comments that may dispute our interpretation.

Much Love

The NIF team.