UK Offence Report

Supply and delivery of military goods

regulation 20(3) of The Counter-Terrorism (International Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

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

3 A person who contravenes

a prohibition in paragraph (1) commits an offence, but it is

a defence for

a person charged with that offence (“P”) to show that P did not know and had no reasonable cause to suspect that the person to whom, or for whose benefit, the goods were supplied or delivered was

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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

The defence, as drafted

enes a prohibition in paragraph (1) commits an offence, but it is a defence for a person charged with that offence (“P”) to show that P did not know and had no reasonable cause to suspect that the person to whom, or for whose benefit, the goods were supplied or delivered was a designated person.

What would breach regulation 20(3)?

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 contravenes a prohibition in paragraph (1).
  2. Moving, converting or paying away funds that belong to a designated person under the Counter-Terrorism (International Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, 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
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
14 March 2019
In force from
Not determined
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 are made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (c.13) to establish a sanctions regime to further the prevention of terrorism in the United Kingdom and elsewhere and to implement the United Kingdom’s international obligations under resolution 1373 (2001) adopted by the Security Council of the United Nations on 28th September 2001 (“resolution 1373”). Following the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union, these Regulations replace two EU sanctions regimes in respect of terrorism. One of the EU regimes is the regime adopted on the basis of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP and implemented by Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001. This was implemented in the UK through the Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010 (“TAFA”). TAFA also implemented the United Kingdom’s obligations under resolution 1373. The other regime is the EU’s autonomous regime in respect of ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida which was implemented by Council Regulation (EU) Regulation 2016/1686. The Regulations confer a power on the Secretary of State to designate persons who are, or have been involved in terrorism, wheresoever the involvement took place. Designated persons may be excluded from the United Kingdom, may be made subject to financial sanctions, including having their funds and/or economic resources frozen, and may be subject to trade restrictions on military goods and military technology and associated services. The Regulations provide for certain exceptions to this sanctions regime, in particular in relation to financial sanctions (for example to allow for frozen accounts to be credited with interest or other earnings) and also for acts done for the purpose of national security or the prevention of serious crime. The Regulations also confer powers on the Treasury to issue licenses in respect of activities that would otherwise by prohibited under the financial sanctions imposed. These Regulations make it a criminal offence to contravene, or circumvent, any of the prohibitions in these Regulations and prescribe the mode of trial and penalties that apply to such offences. The Regulations also confer powers on specified maritime enforcement officers to stop and search ships in international and foreign waters for the purpose of enforcing specified trade sanctions and to seize goods found on board ships which are being, or have been, dealt with in contravention, or deemed contravention, of those prohibitions. The Regulations prescribe powers for the provision and sharing of information to enable the effective implementation and enforcement of this sanctions regime. These Regulations revoke certain existing EU regulations and UK legislation, these are: Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 (concerning specific restrictive measures against certain persons with a view to combating terrorism), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/24 of 8 January 2019 (implementing Council Regulation (EC) No. 2580/2001); Council Regulation (EU) No 2016/1686 of 20 September 2016 (concerning additional restrictive measures against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda); and the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida (Asset-Freezing) Regulations 2011 (S.I. 2011/2742). An Impact Assessment has not been produced for these Regulations, as they are intended to ensure existing sanctions remain in place following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. These Regulations are intended to deliver substantially the same policy effects as the existing European Union sanctions. An Impact Assessment was, however, produced for the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 and can be found at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/653271/Sanctions_and_Anti-Money_Laundering_Bill_Impact_Assessment_18102017.pdf.

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 →

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

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