A bill passed in the ACT parliament on Tuesday will allow courts to impose non-association and place restriction orders or NAPROs on those convicted of serious firearm or money laundering offences.

NAPROs have been touted as a more palatable alternative to anti-consorting laws, which have been scrapped due to their impact on human rights.

The orders can be imposed on criminals convicted of serious drug, domestic violence and property offences as part of a good behaviour bond or intensive corrections order.

But despite helping Labor to pass the bill, Canberra Liberal Jeremy Hanson said there were similar human rights concerns over NAPROs as with anti-consorting laws.

"It is somewhat hypocritical that the government that has been arguing against anti-association laws with regard to dealing with outlaw motorcycle gangs, is today in this place to argue for anti association laws," Mr Hanson said.

"The government and others in the community have said we can't possibly breach the human rights act and freedom of association and this bill we're debating today, presented by the government, does just that."

However ACT Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said NAPROs could be "clearly distinguished" from anti-consorting laws, despite Mr Hanson's attempt to "blur" the distinction.

"A NAPRO is a significant restriction on someone however it is subject to a court's discretion," Mr Ramsay said.

"NAPROs support rehabilitation and protect the community by preventing an offender from getting themselves into situations which may encourage bad behaviour."

By comparison,under the anti-consorting laws outlined in a discussion paper last year, police could issue a warning to a convicted offender or member of a criminal gang to stop associating.

The written warning would last two years and a recipient could be charged if they had intentionally consorted two or more times.

Mr Ramsay said the recent use of a NAPRO in sentencing a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang demonstrated "the strength of the measures that are currently available to the justice system".

But Greens politician Shane Rattenbury said he still had concerns about the use of NAPROs which had not been addressed when the scheme was first expanded last year.

He said an evaluation of non-association orders by the NSW Ombudsman found they had a disproportionate effect on young and Indigenous people.

"It seems to be an attempt to stretch an existing law so ostensibly it can also be used as a tool for combating organised crime. I don't think this is a good change and I don't think it was sound policy or sound law making," Mr Rattenbury said.

"A stated intent of the government's new NAPRO scheme is that it will remove bad influences and allow an offender to rehabilitate.

"Another consideration though is by criminalising association NAPROs offer another way for offenders to commit an offence and thereby return to the criminal justice system to perpetuate negative influences."

However Mr Ramsay said there was no evidence NAPROs, as used in the ACT, had a disproportionate impact on disadvantaged people.

"Adding these two crimes to the list is well justified. Money laundering and serious firearm offences are often the product of criminal conspiracies," Mr Ramsy said.

The bill also included provisions to expand the circumstances in which police can get urgent entry and search warrant to prevent child sex offences from occurring.