Proceeding contribution from Lord Lloyd of Berwick (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 December 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
I support Amendment No. 30, which has my name attached to it. I very much agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Williams. Once intent was introduced to Clause 1 as a necessary ingredient in that offence, it is wholly illogical that it should not be introduced as a necessary ingredient in the Clause 2 offence. There still seems to be some belief, on which I touched on Monday, that intent is difficult to prove. It is not. It is proved every day in criminal courts. Judges are used to summing up how juries should approach questions of intent. There is no difficulty in it. We must introduce the concept of intent as a necessary ingredient in the Clause 2 offence. I lend all the support that I can to this amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 676 c642
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Crimes of violence Crimes against property ICT Jurisdiction Incitement Fines Libraries Internet Journalism Police Prosecutions Publications Sentencing Universities Terrorism Training Research Students Academic freedom Propaganda Encouragement of terrorism Bookshops
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:26:54 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284896
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284896
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_284896