Proceeding contribution from Robert Marshall-Andrews (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
Strangely enough, I agree, but I do not entirely understand why it is a flaw. I do not see why it should be a flaw to restrict the criminal offence of doing something recklessly—in other words, perceiving the likely consequences of an action but doing it in any event—to its effect on reasonable people. The point is that if I perceive that there may be unreasonable people out there who will receive such a statement as encouragement or inducement to such behaviour, but I go ahead and make that statement, I commit the offence under the terms of the Bill. So every single such statement will be caught, because I must be taken to understand that what I say may be so received by unreasonable people.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c404
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Civil liberties Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Appeals Detainees Applications Arrests Evidence Incitement Judges National security Prosecutions Police custody Terrorism Remand in custody Cryptography High Court Habeas corpus Encouragement of terrorism Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-09-24 16:00:57 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661