UK Offence Report

Any person who commits and offence under article 12, 13, 17(1) or (2), 18(3), or 22(3)(b)(ii) is guilty of a…

paragraph 2 of SCHEDULE 2 of The Afghanistan (United Nations Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) Order 2001

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

2 Any person who commits and offence under article 12, 13, 17(1) or (2), 18(3), or 22(3)(b)(ii) is guilty of

a misdemeanour and shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for

a term not exceeding two years, or to

a fine, or to both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
breaching the provision
Fault element
Mixed — some elements strict, some not
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove the conduct, and - for those elements the provision qualifies (recklessly) - the state of mind it names. The remaining elements carry no fault requirement, so they are strict.

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: the offence itself carries no fault word, but a duty it criminalises by cross-reference uses recklessly; which element that governs was not determined.

The defence, as drafted

offence in contravention of paragraph (2) of this article, it shall be a defence for the accused person to prove that he did not know and had no reason to suppose that the carriage of persons or goods was by a person connected with the Taliban.

What would breach paragraph 2 of SCHEDULE 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 commits and offence under article 12, 13, 17(1) or (2), 18(3), or 22(3)(b)(ii).
  2. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Afghanistan (United Nations Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) Order 2001.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Unlimited
Maximum prison (summary)
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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Al-Qa'ida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2002
Revoked on
25 January 2002
Made
14 February 2001
In force from
16 February 2001
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

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, applies to each of the territories specified in Schedule 1. It imposes restrictions pursuant to a decision of the Security Council of the United Nations in its Resolution 1333 of 19th December 2000, on the delivery or supply of arms and related matériel, the provision of technical assistance and training, and the supply of acetic anhydride to Afghanistan. The Order also restricts the taking off from, landing in or flying over any of the specified territories of flights destined for or originating from Afghanistan. It also prohibits the making available of funds to Usama bin Laden and his associates, and prohibits the establishment or maintenance of Taliban offices or the carrying on of any business by Ariana Afghan Airlines. In addition, the Order imposes restrictions pursuant to a decision of the Security Council of the United Nations in its Resolution 1267 of 15th October 1999 by prohibiting any aircraft from taking off from or landing in the specified territories if it is owned, leased, or operated by or on behalf of the Taliban. It also freezes assets of the Taliban or any undertaking owned or controlled by them. This Order revokes the Afghanistan (United Nations Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) Order 1999.

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 0.72.

Basis
the provision states liability on summary conviction
Confidence
0.72 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