DC Ferreira is investigating Lim, who has been found in possession of a document containing detailed instructions for manufacturing an improvised explosive device. Lim states he downloaded it out of curiosity after finding a link online and has never shared it or acted on it. DC Ferreira considers s.58 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Which of the following is correct?
- ALim commits an offence under s.58 and his curiosity provides no defence - s.58 contains no reasonable excuse defence and possession alone is sufficient.
- BLim commits an offence under s.58 - mere curiosity is unlikely to amount to a reasonable excuse, and the prosecution does not need to prove he intended to use or share the information.
- CNo offence is committed under s.58 because Lim did not intend to use the information - the offence requires proof that the defendant intended to assist or commit an act of terrorism.
- DNo offence is committed under s.58 because Lim did not share or disseminate the document - possession alone without onward transmission is insufficient.
Show answer and explanation
Under s.58(1) TA 2000, it is an offence to collect, record or possess information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. No intent to use or share is required - possession is sufficient. A reasonable excuse defence exists under s.58(3) - possession for journalistic or research purposes may qualify. Mere curiosity is unlikely to satisfy the reasonable excuse test.
- A: s.58(3) does provide a reasonable excuse defence - Option A is wrong to deny this. However curiosity is unlikely to satisfy it, so the offence remains made out on these facts.
- C: Intent to use the information is not required under s.58. Possession of information of the relevant kind is sufficient.
- D: Dissemination or onward sharing is not required. Possession or collection alone satisfies the actus reus of s.58(1).