UK Offence Report

Offences in connection with applications for licences, conditions attaching to licences, etc.

article 5(1) of The United Nations Arms Embargoes (Somalia, Liberia and Rwanda) (Channel Islands) Order 1996

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

1 If for the purpose of obtaining any licence under this Order any person—

a makes any statement or furnishes any document or information which to his knowledge is false in

a material particular; or

b recklessly makes any statement or furnishes any document or information which is false in

a material particular, he shall be guilty of an offence under this Order.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
making a false or misleading statement
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (for the purpose of obtaining, recklessly).

The provision gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: recklessly, for the purpose of obtaining.

The defence, as drafted

n offence in contravention of paragraph (1) of this article it shall be a defence for the accused person to prove— a that he did not know and had no reason to suppose that the goods in question were prohibited goods; or b that he did not know and had no reason to suppose that the goods were to be delivered or supplied to a prohibited destination or to, or to the order of

What would breach article 5(1)?

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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the United Nations Arms Embargoes (Somalia, Liberia and Rwanda) (Channel Islands) Order 1996.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
Unlimited
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

'to a fine' with no stated maximum.

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
19 December 1996
In force from
21 December 1996
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, gives effect in the Channel Islands to the imposition of restrictions pursuant to decisions of the Security Council of the United Nations in Resolution No. 733 of 23rd January 1992 which provided for States to “implement a general and complete embargo on all deliveries of weapons and military equipment” in relation to Somalia, Resolution No. 788 of 19th November 1992 which made similar provision in relation to Liberia, and Resolution No. 918 of 17th May 1994 which made similar provision in relation to Rwanda.

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