UK Offence Report

Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Rules

rule 12(g)(vi) of The Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2024

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

Under section 22B(6A) and (6B) of the 2000 Act the analysis to assist in which information may be sought may be (i) operational analysis of information that is relevant to a terrorist financing or suspected terrorist financing (defined by section 22B(14) as an act which constitutes an offence under any of sections 15 to 18 of the Act, or under a provision corresponding with an offence under any of those sections), or (ii) strategic analysis identifying trends or patterns in the conduct of terrorist financing, or systemic deficiencies or vulnerabilities which have been, are being or are likely to be, exploited for the purposes of terrorist financing.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
failing to do something the instrument requires
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 rule 12(g)(vi)?

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. Not doing what the provision requires under the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2024, by the time it requires it to be done.
  2. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

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
18 January 2024
In force from
1 April 2024
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 Rules) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Rules amend the Criminal Procedure Rules 2020, S.I. 2020/759, as follows: Rule Amendment Part 2 Rule 2.2 is amended to include a reference to live links in extradition proceedings. Rule 2.8 is amended to allow a justices’ legal adviser to direct the correction of a court record (and see the amendment to rule 5.4). Part 3 Rule 3.1 is amended to include a reference to extradition proceedings. Rules 3.3 and 3.8 are amended to provide for witness companions and advisors. Rule 3.19 is amended to list all the circumstances in which the prosecutor is required to serve evidence in the Crown Court. Rule 3.35 is amended (i) to apply the rule in extradition proceedings, and (ii) to require the applicant for a live link from abroad to obtain any permission needed from the authorities there. Part 5 Rule 5.4 is amended to acknowledge the powers of courts and court officers to correct errors in court records. Part 14 Rule 14.6 is amended to require an application to vary bail conditions to be made to the court that authorised the extension of pre-charge bail, where a defendant is on pre-charge bail that has been extended. Part 15 Rules 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.4, 15.5 and 15.9 are amended, and the notes at the end of the rule are omitted, (i) to clarify the procedures required by the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, and (ii) to provide for the service of a prosecutor’s disclosure management document. Part 18 Rule 18.1 is amended, and rules 18.14 to 18.17 are omitted, to remove redundant rules about defendant’s evidence directions. Rule 18.8 is amended to provide for the editing of a video recording of pre-trial cross-examination if that is ordered by the court. Part 33 Rules 33.2 and 33.3 are omitted to allow time limits equivalent to existing time limits to be expressed in business days, as in other Criminal Procedure Rules. Rule 33.13 is replaced with a new procedure for confiscation proceedings. Rules 33.24, 33.25, 33.26, 33.27 and 33.28 are amended or replaced to accommodate statutory amendments made by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Rules 33.47 to 33.50 are revoked so that costs in restraint proceedings can be governed by the costs rules in Part 45 (and see the amendments to those rules). Rule 33.53 is amended to provide explicitly for applications for the release of living expenses from restrained funds. Part 44 Rule 44.3 is amended to acknowledge a court’s power to substitute a valid for an invalid decision. Part 45 Rules 45.1, 45.2 and 45.7 are amended to provide for costs orders in restraint proceedings. Part 47 Rules 47.4, 47.5, 47.9, 47.11, 47.12, 47.13, 47.14, 47.15, 47.16, 47.20, 47.24 and 47.31 are amended or replaced to accommodate statutory amendments made by the National Security Act 2023 and the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Rule 47.27 is amended to clarify the requirements for the content of a search warrant. Part 50 Rule 50.3 is amended the better to accommodate the use of live links in extradition proceedings (and see the amendments to rule 3.35). Amendments consequent on other rule amendments. In Part 33, rules 33.5, 33.11, 33.15, 33.16, 33.17, 33.18, 33.19, 33.20, 33.22, 33.23, 33.24, 33.26, 33.31, 33.32, 33.46, 33.53, 33.54, 33.56, 33.57, 33.58, 33.59, 33.62 and 33.65 are amended to substitute references to time limits expressed in business days. Correction of errors. Rules 14.6, 39.3 and 46.4 are amended to correct typographical and other errors. These Rules come into force on 1st April 2024.

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 0.75.

Basis
the provision says the conduct “constitutes an offence”
Confidence
0.75 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