Definition
The Act defines harassment in section 1(1) as a "course of conduct" amounting to harassment and provides by section 7(3) that a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions. (Originally these occasions needed to involve the same person, but in 2005 the Act was amended by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act so that "pursuing a course of conduct" could mean approaching two people just once.) If these requirements are satisfied, the claimant may pursue a civil remedy for damages for anxiety: section 3(2). The use of civil law means that the standards of evidence are substantially lower than for criminal law, for example permitting hearsay. The requirement of a course of conduct shows that Parliament was conscious that it might not be in the public interest to allow the law to be set in motion for one boorish incident.
The editor of "Archbold" says that this Act does not attempt to define "harassment". Section 7(2) of the Act provides that, for the purpose of the interpretation of sections 1 to 5A, references to harassing a person include alarming the person or causing the person distress.
The effect of section 7(2) is that harassment includes causing the victim alarm or distress.
A person guilty of an offence under section 2 is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both. There are also a variety of civil remedies that can be used including awarding of damages, and restraining orders backed by the power of arrest.
Commentators such as George Monbiot have voiced the concern that the amended Act effectively "allows the police to ban any campaign they please", and that it has been used to prosecute peaceful protestors.
The summary offences of harassment "cast the net too wide". The offence created by section 2 is "broad and ill-defined". Its scope is "quite enormous". It might well violate Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (in addition to Article 7 mentioned above). The "course of conduct" element defies definition. The Act contains no definition of "course of conduct" beyond the provisions of sections 7(3) and (4).
See also Green v DB Group Services (UK) Ltd EWHC 1898, IRLR 764, QB (1 August 2006).
Read more about this topic: Protection From Harassment Act 1997
Famous quotes containing the word definition:
“The man who knows governments most completely is he who troubles himself least about a definition which shall give their essence. Enjoying an intimate acquaintance with all their particularities in turn, he would naturally regard an abstract conception in which these were unified as a thing more misleading than enlightening.”
—William James (1842–1910)
“It’s a rare parent who can see his or her child clearly and objectively. At a school board meeting I attended . . . the only definition of a gifted child on which everyone in the audience could agree was “mine.””
—Jane Adams (20th century)
“... we all know the wag’s definition of a philanthropist: a man whose charity increases directly as the square of the distance.”
—George Eliot [Mary Ann (or Marian)