UK Offence Report

Circumvention of relevant prohibitions in the Burma Regulation

article 6 of The Export Control (Burma Sanctions) (No. 2) 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

6 A person who participates, knowingly and intentionally, in an activity the object or effect of which is—

a to circumvent any relevant prohibition in

a provision of the Burma Regulation mentioned in article 5(2) or (4) of this Order; or

b to enable or facilitate the circumvention of any such prohibition, commits an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (intentionally, knowingly).

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

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: knowingly, intentionally.

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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Export Control (Burma Sanctions) (No. 2) Order 2018.

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
20 July 2018
In force from
14 August 2018
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 makes provision in connection with the trade restrictions against Burma specified in Council Regulation (EU) 401/2013 of 2 May 2013 (OJ No. L121, 3.5.2013, p.1) as amended by Council Regulation (EU) 2018/647 of 26 April 2018 (OJ No. L108, 27.4.2018, p.1) (“the Burma Regulation”). This Order revokes and replaces the Export Control (Burma Sanctions) Order 2018 (S.I. 2018/871). Article 4 provides for the granting of licences for the purposes of the provisions of the Burma Regulation which allow a competent authority to authorise trade related activities which would otherwise be prohibited. The competent authority for these purposes is the Secretary of State. A licence granted by the Secretary of State may be varied, suspended or revoked. Article 4(7) makes it an offence to knowingly or recklessly provide false information for the purpose of obtaining a licence. Article 4(9) makes it an offence to fail to comply with any condition attached to a licence. Article 5 creates offences for contravention of relevant prohibitions in the Burma Regulation. “Relevant prohibitions” are trade prohibitions but do not include prohibitions on the export of goods. Offences for contravention or circumvention of prohibitions on the export of goods are to be found in the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c.2) (“the 1979 Act”). Article 6 creates an offence of circumventing any relevant prohibition in the Burma Regulation. Article 7 makes provision for a defence for a person charged with certain offences under the Order. Article 8 sets out the penalties relating to the offences under this Order. Article 9 makes modifications to the penalties that will apply where a person is guilty of an offence under the 1979 Act in connection with the exportation of goods which is prohibited by the Burma Regulation. Article 10 applies (with modifications) sections 77A, 138, 145, 146, 146A, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 154 and 155 of the 1979 Act for the purposes of the Order. These sections, as applied, make provision in connection with the investigation of and proceedings for offences under this Order. An impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as it has no or minimal impact on business, charities or voluntary bodies. A copy of the Explanatory Memorandum is published alongside the Order on www.legislation.gov.uk. Further information is available from the Export Control Organisation, Department for International Trade, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW and on the gov.uk website (www.gov.uk).

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

How this became law

This instrument became law without a debate or a vote. Under the negative procedure it took effect unless a motion to stop it succeeded, and none was tabled.

Neither House could have amended it. A statutory instrument is put to each House as a whole thing, to be approved or not; the Houses can reject an instrument or record their regret, but they cannot change a word of it. That is the constitutional position for every offence on this site.

The full procedural history →

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 “commits 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