Police and local councils today gained the power to restrict the movements of people accused of being members of gangs.

This is the final blow to the ASBO, with figures showing that breach rates reached 73% among young teenagers. Ministry of Justice figures show that the number of ASBOS issued by the courts fell to only 1,671 in 2009, confirming the year-by-year decline from a peak of 4,122 in 2005. However, some commentators have questioned the accuracy of breach rates.

Gang injunctions, which are similar to anti-social behaviour orders (asbos) and were drawn up by the last Labour government, are drawn up according to the specific concerns about individuals.

The new measures in England and Wales enable the authorities to ban people from specific neighbourhoods known for violence between rival groups, but can also stop people from wearing certain colours known to identify them with a gang or walking aggressive dogs. They can also compel people to attend mentoring schemes which would teach them how to protect themselves from gang culture.

The injunctions can be applied in county courts against adults whom the police and local councils believe are involved in gang-related crime and violence, though ministers say they will not replace other convictions for such offences. Further measures covering gang activity amongst youths aged between 14 and 17 are to be trialled later this year.

Beyond ASBOs

Home Secretary Theresa May has said the ASBO regime would be partially continued. Officers will get more discretion to deal with offenders such as forcing them to make amends on the spot, clearing up their own graffiti or repairing property, rather than the more lengthy route involving the courts.

In addition to today's new powers, May will propose five new measures that still give police very wide powers:

• A "criminal behaviour order" that could, for instance, see someone who is convicted of being drunk and disorderly banned from a town centre for two years.

• A civil "crime prevention injunction" which could be obtained within "hours rather than months".

• Court orders to close a property where there has been persistent disorder.

• Fines for people who have been a persistent nuisance and harmed the quality of life in an area.

• A "direction to leave" which will see any individual causing or likely to cause crime directed away from a particular place and "related items" confiscated.

With evidence suggesting local authorities and the police found ASBOs "difficult and bureaucratic" this signals the intention to take anti-social behaviour more swiftly and seriously. It also means police forces which failed to protect victims of antisocial behaviour could be sued for compensation if people felt their concerns had not been heeded.

The proposed bill will also include measures encouraging communities to act together to deal with unruly behaviour. A new government website will be launched showing where crimes are committed, allowing members of the public to monitor crime levels.

The role of local authorities

These powers allow councils to ban those accused of being in gangs from being in certain places or walking dogs that could be used as weapons.  County courts, on request from police and/or local councils, would have the powers to impose this new injunction against adults.

The "gang injunction" was proposed by the previous Labour government, following failure of Birmingham City Council to use civil injunctions against gang members in the city.

These new injunctions would work like ASBOs and would be designed for each individual. Under the scheme, injunctions could force people not to wear certain colours used by gangs for memberships and to take part in mentoring schemes. The government would pilot a similar scheme for 14-17 year olds later this year.

"Gangs cause significant and lasting harm to our communities through fuelling violence, creating an atmosphere of fear and drawing young people into criminality," said Mr Brokenshire, the Crime Prevention Minister.

"These new powers will help police and local authorities tackle local gang problems by placing tough conditions on the behaviour of individuals involved in gang-related violence and providing strong support to those who want to leave violent gangs."

However civil liberties groups are concerned about circumventing the rule of law.

"Yet again shortcuts around fair trials risk huge injustice," Isabella Sankey, policy director at Liberty said. "These orders allow guilt by association for young people who need support but also tempt the authorities away from prosecuting violent criminals."