Young black men who fit a certain profile may be subject to unconstitutional requests by police to disperse from an area, according to local defence attorney and opposition Senator Marc Daniels.

Mr Daniels will be challenging in Supreme Court the constitutionality of Section 110 in the Criminal Code that allows for the dispersal of groups in an areas known for persistent and significant issues with antisocial behaviour.

After agreeing to take the case pro-bono in Magistrates’ Court yesterday, Mr Daniels will be representing Vernon Symonds, who was arrested in September 2012 for using offensive words and refusing to comply with directions given to him by police under Section 110 of the Criminal Code, ordering him to disperse from the junction of Middle Road and Woodlawn Road in Sandys.

Mr Daniels is arguing Mr Symonds, and other “young black individuals fitting a particular ‘look’,” may be unfairly, and unconstitutionally, targeted by police.

“We queried whether it was right to leave it to the police officers’ judgment, for example, if a church group was in a prayer circle,” said Mr Daniels. “It is unreasonable, although possible, they could have been asked to move.

“But it is more likely individuals, particularly young black individuals, may be more susceptible to unconstitutional requests to leave an area simply because they fit a profile.”

It is a case of conflict between one’s right to a peaceful and free assembly, and the need to prevent large crowds gathering in areas prone to antisocial behaviour, said Mr Daniels.

As the law stands, the right to free assembly can be superseded in the interest of public safety, however Mr Daniels maintained that merely being present in such a locality is insufficient grounds for police to issue a Dispersal Order.

“Mr Symonds lives right across the street from where he was ultimately arrested,” said Mr Daniels. “He literally lived less than 100 yards from the place of his arrest.

“No ... evidence existed to suggest that there was a need to contravene [the] constitutional right [to free assembly] in the circumstances of the case.

“The UK authorities suggest that there must be some reasonable grounds for asking someone to disperse as opposed to merely relying on the fact that members in the community have complained generally about the antisocial behaviour in that locality.”