UK Offence Report

Interpretation

regulation 2(1) of The Electronic Commerce Directive (Terrorism Act 2006) Regulations 2007

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

“relevant offence” is an offence under section 1 or 2 of the Act;

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 regulation 2(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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Electronic Commerce Directive (Terrorism Act 2006) Regulations 2007.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

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
23 May 2007
In force from
21 June 2007
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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations give effect to Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8th June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (“the Directive”) in relation to matters within the scope of sections 1 to 4 of the Terrorism Act 2006 (“the Terrorism Act”). The Directive (which has been incorporated into the EEA agreement) seeks to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market by ensuring the free movement of information society services (“ISS”) between EEA states. Article 3 provides for the regulation of ISS on a “country of origin” basis and Articles 12 to 14 require EEA states to limit, in specified circumstances, the liability of intermediary ISS providers when they provide mere conduit, caching or hosting services. Regulations 3 and 4 ensure that sections 1 to 4 of the Terrorism Act apply on a country of origin basis. Section 1 of the Terrorism Act creates an offence of publishing a statement that is likely to be understood as encouraging terrorism and section 2 creates an offence relating to the dissemination of terrorist publications. Sections 3 and 4 make specific provision for the application of sections 1 and 2 to internet activity. In particular, section 3 provides for the issue by a constable of a notice requiring the removal or amendment of a statement, article or record that, in the opinion of the constable issuing the notice, is unlawfully terrorism-related. Regulation 3 extends the application of the offences in sections 1 and 2 of the Terrorism Act so that these offences apply to UK established ISS providers where they provide ISS in EEA states other than the UK. This means that sections 3 and 4 of the Terrorism Act also apply in such a case. Regulation 3 does not apply where section 17 of the Terrorism Act (commission of offences abroad) already applies. Regulation 4 means that service providers who are established in an EEA state other than the UK can only be prosecuted for an offence under section 1 or 2 of the Terrorism Act, or given a notice under section 3, where the conditions laid down in Article 3(4) of the Directive are satisfied. Regulations 5 to 7 create exceptions from liability for the offences under sections 1 and 2 of the Terrorism Act for intermediary ISS providers when they provide mere conduit, caching or hosting services in the circumstances specified by Articles 12 to 14 of the Directive. A Transposition Note has been prepared for these Regulations and a Regulatory Impact Assessment was prepared for the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2013) (which generally implemented the Directive in relation to legislation already passed or made when those Regulations were made). A copy of each of these documents has been placed in the libraries of both Houses of Parliament and are available from the International Communications Unit, Department of Trade and Industry, Bay 202, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9SS.

Read the full note and every offence in this 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 0.62.

Basis
the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.62 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