Provision of certain technical assistance or training

article 5(1) of The Overseas Territories (Zimbabwe) (Restrictive Measures) Order 2002

Status not determined
Strict liability
Either way
Immigration and identity documents

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 Any person, except under the authority of
a licence granted by the Governor under this article, who from the Territory directly or indirectly provides to
a person or place in Zimbabwe any technical assistance or training related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of any restricted goods 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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: breaching the provision
Fault element: Strict liability
Burden of proof: No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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.

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

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.

Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Overseas Territories (Zimbabwe) (Restrictive Measures) Order 2002.

Penalty

Mode of trial: Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine: £5,000
Maximum prison (summary): 3 months
Maximum prison (on indictment): 2 years

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.

Imposition of community and custodial sentences: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales
When a community order or custody is justified at all, and the presumption against short custodial sentences.
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
General guideline: overarching principles All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
Totality: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.

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: 17 April 2002
In force from: 19 April 2002
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 Order applies to each of the British overseas territories listed in Schedule 1. It imposes restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe and those who bear a wide responsibility for the serious violations of human rights and of the freedom of opinion, of association and of peaceful assembly in that country. These measures include the prohibition of the delivery or supply of arms and related matériel and equipment that might be used for internal repression to Zimbabwe, and the prohibition of making available funds, financial assets or economic resources to persons listed in Schedule 4 and the freezing of their funds, financial assets or economic resources.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

Failure to disclose knowledge or suspicion of measuresarticle 10(1)
Customs powers to demand evidence of destination which goods reacharticle 11
Any person who has done any act under the authority of a licence granted by the Governor under this Order…article 12
If for the purposes of obtaining any licence under this Order any person makes any statement or furnishes…article 12(1)
Any person who has done any act under the authority of a licence granted by the Governor under this Order…article 12(2)
Declaration as to goods: powers of searcharticle 13(2)
Declaration as to goods: powers of searcharticle 13(3)
Provisions supplementary to articles 14 to 16article 17(3)
Supply of restricted goodsarticle 3(1)
Supply of restricted goodsarticle 3(2)
Provision of certain technical assistance or trainingarticle 5(2)
Use of ships, aircraft and vehicles: restricted goods, technical assistance and trainingarticle 6(3)

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

This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
The Overseas Territories (Zimbabwe) (Restrictive Measures) Order 2002 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Immigration and identity documentsOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 2002