UK Offence Report

Information relating to funds etc.

article 4E(5) of The Burma and Somalia (Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) (Amendment) Order 2018 (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

5 It is an offence for

a relevant institution or relevant business or profession to fail to comply with

a requirement of paragraph (2), (3) or (4).

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 institution
Conduct
failing to comply with a notice or direction
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 institution 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; other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

What would breach article 4E(5)?

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. Being served with a notice under the Burma and Somalia (Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) (Amendment) Order 2018 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  2. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  3. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

Penalty

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

no penalty is stated here: this instrument amends another one, and the penalty for the offence is in the instrument being amended.

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
12 December 2018
In force from
9 January 2019
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 amends the Burma (Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) Order 2013 (S.I. 2013/1447) and gives effect in specified Overseas Territories to sanctions measures adopted by the European Union in Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/655, which was adopted on 26th April 2018, and Council Regulation (EU) 2018/647, which was also adopted on 26th April 2018. The sanctions imposed include specific measures in relation to equipment that might be used for internal repression and to prevent the misuse of communication equipment. They also include measures to enable the freezing of assets of persons from the Myanmar Armed Forces (Tatmadaw) and the Border Guard Police designated by the Council of the European Union as responsible for serious human rights violations, obstructing the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in need, or obstructing the conduct of independent investigations into alleged human rights violations or abuses, or any natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them. The Order also makes relevant provision for the Governors of the specified Overseas Territories to license certain activities. This Order also amends the Somalia (Sanctions) (Overseas Territories) Order 2012 (S.I. 2012/3065) to give effect to a minor textual amendment contained in United Nations Security Council resolution 2385 (2017) adopted on 14th November 2017.

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 0.90.

Basis
the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.90 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