UK Offence Report

Declaration as to goods: powers of search

article 14(2) of The Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1994

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

2 Any person who without reasonable excuse refuses to make

a declaration, fails to produce any goods or refuse to allow himself to be searched in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this article shall be guilty of an offence.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a person
Conduct
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a person meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.

Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

2 Any person who without reasonable excuse refuses to make a declaration, fails to produce any goods or refuse to allow himself to be searched in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this article shall be guilty of an offence.

What would breach article 14(2)?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. On these words an offence is committed where a person without reasonable excuse refuses to make a declaration, fails to produce any goods or refuse to allow himself to be searched in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this article.
  2. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1994.
  3. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  4. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
Not determined
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months

the level is stated but no money value is given: this instrument extends outside the United Kingdom, where the standard scale set by s.122(1) of the Sentencing Act 2020 does not run.

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
18 May 1994
In force from
23 May 1994
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order, made under the United Nations Act 1946, re-enacts with certain modifications, the provisions of the Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1993 (S.I. 1993/1794) and imposes further restrictions pursuant to a decision of the Security Council of the United Nations in Resolution No. 917 of 6th May 1994, on the export of goods to Haiti and the supply of goods to persons connected with Haiti, and on the importation of goods from Haiti. It restricts certain related activities including the carriage of prohibited goods in ships, aircraft and vehicles. The Order also prohibits aircraft, except for scheduled passenger aircraft, from taking off from, landing in or flying over the Isle of Man if they are destined for, or have taken off from, Haiti. It also restricts the making of payments under any bond in respect of a contract the performance of which is unlawful by virtue of the Order, and prohibits making or obtaining payments under certain indemnities in respect of such bonds.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.92.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.92 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source