UK Offence Report

Provision of technical assistance related to military activities

article 6 of The Afghanistan (United Nations Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2012 (revoked)

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

6 Any person who directly or indirectly provides to

a designated person any technical assistance in relation to military activities including the provision, manufacture, maintenance and use of restricted goods shall be guilty of an offence under this Order unless they prove that they did not know and had no reasonable cause to suspect that the technical assistance in question was to be provided to

a designated person.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
dealing with funds or making them available in breach of sanctions
Fault element
Objective fault
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened and that it fell below the standard the provision sets. That is an objective test - what a reasonable person in the same position would have done, not what this defendant actually thought.

What a person personally believed or intended is not the question; the standard is what was reasonable.

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: objective standard in the offence-creating words: reasonable cause to suspect.

The defence, as drafted

ricted goods shall be guilty of an offence under this Order unless they prove that they did not know and had no reasonable cause to suspect that the technical assistance in question was to be provided to a designated person.

What would breach article 6?

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 directly or indirectly provides to a designated person any technical assistance in relation to military activities including the provision, manufacture, maintenance and use of restricted goods.
  2. Moving, converting or paying away funds that belong to a designated person under the Afghanistan (United Nations Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2012, without a licence from the Treasury.
  3. Making funds or economic resources available to a designated person - which includes paying a third party who will pass on the benefit.
  4. Dealing with an asset in ignorance of the designation is still caught where the provision imposes no knowledge requirement; check the fault element stated below before assuming otherwise.

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.

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
10 July 2012
In force from
7 August 2012
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.

The Order, made under the United Nations Act 1946, the St Helena Act 1833, the British Settlements Acts 1887 and 1945, and prerogative powers, gives effect to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1988 (2011) adopted on 17th June 2011. Resolution 1988 (2011) maintains in force the sanctions first imposed by resolution 1267 (1999) against the Taliban. In parallel the Security Council adopted resolution 1989 (2011) maintaining its previous sanctions against persons associated with Al-Qaida, but separating them out into a separate resolution. The effect of the Order is to continue, in the specified Overseas Territories, the asset freeze in respect of the Taliban and persons associated with them in constituting a threat to the peace, stability and security of Afghanistan as designated by the Security Council, and to prohibit funds being made available to such persons. It also prohibits the supply of military goods and technical assistance related to military activities to designated persons. The list of persons designated by the Security Council is to be found at http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/AQList.htm

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