DOCSLIB.ORG

Counter-Terrorism Bill Committee Stage Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Counter-Terrorism Bill Committee Stage Report RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 Counter-Terrorism Bill 5 JUNE 2008 Committee Stage Report Bill 100 of 2007-8 This is a report on the Committee Stage of the Counter-Terrorism Bill, Bill 63 of 2007-08. The Bill as amended in Committee and published for the Report Stage is Bill 100 of 2007-08. This report has been produced in response to a recommendation of the Modernisation Committee in its report on The Legislative Process (HC 1097, 2005-06). The Counter-Terrorism Bill covers a wide range of topics; however, the most contentious have proved to be proposals in relation to pre-charge detention, post charge questioning and inquests and inquiries. The Bill Committee took evidence from a number of witnesses prior to debate, primarily on these issues. It held 14 sittings between 22 April and 15 May 2008. Remaining Stages are to be on 10-11 June 2008. Alexander Horne HOME AFFAIRS SECTION Catherine Fairbairn HOME AFFAIRS SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 Recent Library Research Papers include: 08/36 Transport in London 21.04.08 08/37 Social Indicators 23.04.08 08/38 2001 Census of Population: Statistics for New Parliamentary 23.04.08 Constituencies 08/39 Parliamentary Involvement in Public Appointments 23.04.08 08/40 Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 23.04.08 08/41 Planning and Energy Bill: Committee Stage Report 30.04.08 08/42 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL] [Bill 70 of 2007-08] 02.05.08 08/43 Economic Indicators, May 2008 06.05.08 08/44 Children and Young Persons Bill [HL] [Bill No 8 of 2007-08] 08.05.08 08/45 Unemployment by Constituency, April 2008 14.05.08 08/46 Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL] 2007-08 16.05.08 [Bill 103 of 2007-08] 08/47 London Elections 2008. Elections for Mayor of London and London 20.05.08 Assembly: 1 May 2008 08/48 2008 Local Elections [date tbc] 08/49 Local Transport Bill [HL]: Committee Stage Report 20.05.08 [Bill 106 of 2007-08] 08/50 Health and Safety (Offences) Bill: Committee Stage Report 28.05.08 08/51 Economic Indicators, June 2008 03.06.08 Research Papers are available as PDF files: • to members of the general public on the Parliamentary web site, URL: http://www.parliament.uk • within Parliament to users of the Parliamentary Intranet, URL: http://hcl1.hclibrary.parliament.uk Library Research Papers are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. We welcome comments on our papers; these should be sent to the Research Publications Officer, Room 407, 1 Derby Gate, London, SW1A 2DG or e-mailed to [email protected] ISSN 1368-8456 2 RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 CONTENTS I Main provisions of the Bill 5 II Second Reading, 1 April 2008 6 III Public Bill Committee – Evidence Sessions 9 1. Sir Ian Blair (Metropolitan Police Commissioner) and Bob Quick (Chair, Terrorism and Allied Matters Committee), Association of Chief Police Officers 10 2. Sir Ken Macdonald QC (Director of Public Prosecutions) and Sue Hemming (Head of Counter-Terrorism Division, CPS) 11 3. Lord Goldsmith QC 13 4. Tony McNulty, Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing 14 5. Coroners’ Society of England and Wales 15 IV Public Bill Committee – Debate 15 A. Period of pre-charge detention 15 B. Post-charge questioning 18 C. Jurisdiction to try offences committed in the UK 19 D. Inquests and inquiries 20 1. Amendments agreed 20 2. Other significant areas of debate 20 3. Ministerial undertakings to consider 21 V Other developments 22 1. Potential concessions on pre-charge detention proposals: Media comment 22 2. The Prime Minister’s Article 23 VI Home Office paper on revised pre-charge detention plans 24 A. The proposals 24 B. Responses to the revised proposals 25 C. Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) 27 VII Annex: Members of the Public Bill Committee 28 3 RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 VIII Annex 2 – Recent press coverage 29 IX Annex 3 – Home Office flow chart detailing the process involved in the proposed extension of pre-charge detention. 30 4 RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 I Main provisions of the Bill The Counter-Terrorism Bill was published on 24 January 2008 as Bill 63 of 2007-08.The Bill as amended in Committee and published for the Report Stage is now Bill 100 of 2007-08. It contains a number of provisions which the Government state are designed to enhance counter-terrorism powers. Part 1 of the Bill includes (amongst other things) a new power to remove documents for examination, powers to take fingerprints and samples from people subject to control orders and data sharing powers. Part 2 of the Bill includes a clause to introduce a reserve power to increase the time a person can be detained prior to charge, from 28 days to 42 days, by further amending the Terrorism Act 2000. This is likely to be the most contentious measure contained within the Bill. Part 2 also makes provision for the post-charge questioning of suspects. Part 3 of the Bill introduces provisions for specified terrorism offences committed anywhere in the UK to be tried in any part of the UK. It also deals with sentencing for terrorist offenders, requiring courts to consider a terrorist connection as an aggravating factor. Part 4 would ensure that people convicted of terrorist or terrorism related offences, who were sentenced to more than 12 months imprisonment, would be subject to notification requirements and could be made subject of foreign travel orders. These orders would enable restrictions to be placed on the overseas travel of those persons subject to notification requirements, where there was reasonable cause to believe that they had acted in a way that made it necessary for an order to be made to prevent them from taking part in terrorist activity outside the UK. Part 5 of the Bill relates to asset freezing proceedings and would amend the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in order that intercept material could be used in asset freezing cases related to terrorism. It also provides an enabling power for the Lord Chancellor to make court procedure rules to allow the use of special advocates, closed hearings and withholding of evidence in civil court proceedings relating to asset freezing decisions. Part 6 of the Bill, relating to inquests and inquiries, contains provisions for coroners’ inquests to take place without a jury, where the Secretary of State certifies that the inquest would involve the consideration of material that should not be made public for certain reasons. It would also amend the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 to allow intercept evidence to be disclosed in exceptional circumstances. Parts 5 and 6 of the Bill are the only parts to make reference to intercept evidence and the Bill does not make any provision for the use of such evidence in criminal proceedings. Part 7 of the Bill would amend the definition of terrorism in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to include reference to acts carried out for the purpose of advancing a racial cause. It also creates an offence of communicating information relating to the armed forces, which is likely to be of use to terrorists; and amends the offence of failing to disclose information about a suspected terrorist offence. It includes amendments to the control order regime and a new scheme relating to the recovery of the costs of policing at gas facilities. 5 RESEARCH PAPER 08/52 A House of Commons Library Research Paper, Counter-Terrorism Bill (RP 08/20) provides briefing on the main provisions of the Bill and the background to them. Documents relating to the Bill, including Library publications are available at: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/counterterrorism.html II Second Reading, 1 April 2008 The Bill received an unopposed Second Reading on 1 April 2008.1 While it appears that both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats support some of the proposals in the Bill, there was fierce debate on the proposals relating to pre-charge detention and concern about the proposals on coroners. The Bill was introduced by the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, who said: From the outset, my approach to this Bill has been to emphasise the importance of consultation and consensus-building. We have consulted widely, and at length, with hon. Members, the public, the police, civil liberties organisations, community groups and the judiciary. Our proposals have been scrutinised by relevant Committees here in Parliament, and by Lord Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. I believe that many measures in this Bill have already achieved broad support […] I want to turn now to the issue of the period of time that the police have available to investigate and question a suspect before charge—the period of pre-charge detention. That issue has divided the House before, and today has seen that yet again. It is the issue in the Bill that has been the subject of the greatest debate. Indeed, some have questioned why the Government are returning to this thorny issue once again. Quite simply, the response of the law cannot remain frozen when the scale and the nature of the threat are growing […] In my view the maximum time period is not the most important issue. The most important issue is whether people feel that in all circumstances in the future there would never be a time when 28 days would be insufficient.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Action on Access WP and Access Eupdate Issue 139: 18 June 2021
    1 Action on Access WP and Access eUpdate Issue 139: 18 June 2021 This eBulletin is created and produced by Andrew Rawson, Director, Action on Access, and currently emailed to 1,530 colleagues in the wider access widening participation and student success community. Don’t forget you can follow Action on Access on twitter: @actiononaccess Our eUpdates provide a monthly round-up of the latest news, events, resources and information requests on higher education, and include occasional features on Widening Participation, access, student success and social justice. I hope you find it useful and informative. Please continue to send me your feedback as well as your contributions. This edition will continue to be available until the next monthly edition at http://www.wptestsites.co.uk/actiononaccess/resources/e-update If you have any suggestions for how the newsletter could be improved, have any items of news, an event or an article you would like to contribute, please contact the editor at [email protected]. We disseminate information every day through our [email protected] list and current WP, access, student success and related vacancies are also regularly posted at http://www.wptestsites.co.uk/actiononaccess/resources Contents Welcome to the June 2021 Action on Access eBulletin. ...................................................................3 What’s New .............................................................................................................................................4 Skills and Post-16 Education
    [Show full text]
  • Press Freedom Under Attack
    LEVESON’S ILLIBERAL LEGACY AUTHORS HELEN ANTHONY MIKE HARRIS BREAKING SASHY NATHAN PADRAIG REIDY NEWS FOREWORD BY PROFESSOR TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM UNDER ATTACK , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. WHY IS THE FREE PRESS IMPORTANT? 2. THE LEVESON INQUIRY, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 A background to Leveson: previous inquiries and press complaints bodies 2.2 The Leveson Inquiry’s Limits • Skewed analysis • Participatory blind spots 2.3 Arbitration 2.4 Exemplary Damages 2.5 Police whistleblowers and press contact 2.6 Data Protection 2.7 Online Press 2.8 Public Interest 3. THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK – A LEGAL ANALYSIS 3.1 A rushed and unconstitutional regime 3.2 The use of statute to regulate the press 3.3 The Royal Charter and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 • The use of a Royal Charter • Reporting to Parliament • Arbitration • Apologies • Fines 3.4 The Crime and Courts Act 2013 • Freedom of expression • ‘Provided for by law’ • ‘Outrageous’ • ‘Relevant publisher’ • Exemplary damages and proportionality • Punitive costs and the chilling effect • Right to a fair trial • Right to not be discriminated against 3.5 The Press Recognition Panel 4. THE WIDER IMPACT 4.1 Self-regulation: the international norm 4.2 International response 4.3 The international impact on press freedom 5. RECOMMENDATIONS 6. CONCLUSION 3 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY 4 , LEVESON S ILLIBERAL LEGACY FOREWORD BY TIM LUCKHURST PRESS FREEDOM: RESTORING BRITAIN’S REPUTATION n January 2014 I felt honour bound to participate in a meeting, the very ‘Our liberty cannot existence of which left me saddened be guarded but by the and ashamed.
    [Show full text]
  • Traineeship Brochure 2020
    TRAINEESHIP BROCHURE 2020 Matrix is ‘the future of the Bar.’ Chambers and Partners TRAINEESHIP BROCHURE CONTENTS • Introduction to Matrix- page 2 • Why choose Matrix?- page 2 • Glossary - plain words- page 2 • Becoming a barrister - page 3 • Areas of work - page 3 • Training schedule - page 3 • Life as a trainee - page 4 • Application procedure- page 6 • Deferred applications- page 6 • Third six- page 6 • Training awards- page 6 • Visa requirements- page 6 • Information for applicants who have a disability- page 6 • Traineeship supervisors- page 7 • Matrix selection procedure - page 10 • Stage 1- page 9 • Stage 2- page 110 • Stage 3- page 11 • Notes regarding the application form- page 11 • Equal opportunities- page 11 • Useful contacts- page 11 • Matrix core values- page 12 • Members- page 13 1 INTRODUCTION TO MATRIX Matrix is a barristers’ chambers located in hierarchies and attitudes demonstrated by our London, Geneva and Brussels. We are a members – all these elements make Matrix a collection of lawyers specialising in a wide really great place to train and to work. range of practice areas throughout the UK and Matrix is committed to providing a stimulating, internationally. Described as “professional and balanced and comprehensive training forward thinking”, we are an approachable schedule. As a junior member of Matrix, the set that are proud of our record of innovation. expectation is that you will be in court regularly Our core values govern the way we work and on a wide range of cases and practice areas outline our commitment to operating within an as this is a very important part of continuing environment where diversity, accessibility and training to be a fully-rounded barrister.
    [Show full text]
  • Socialist Lawyer 45
    LawyerI G SocialistMagazine of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers Number 45 December 2006 £2.50 Prison crisis Michael Mansfield, Piers Mostyn & Laura Janes on ‘Gulag Britain’ TONY BENN THE YASMIN SADAT SAYEED BILL BOWRING LAW, SOCIETY KHAN JEAN GUANTANAMO: DO ‘TERROR’ AND A NEW CHARLES DE WORK BEHIND SUSPECTS’ WORLD ORDER MENEZES THE SCENES HAVE RIGHTS? HaldaneSocietyof SocialistLawyers PO Box 57055, London EC1P 1AF Contents Website: www.haldane.org Number 45 December2006 ISBN 09 54 3635 The Haldane Society was founded in 1930. It provides a forum for the discussion and News & comment ................................................................................ 4 analysis of law and the legal system, both From the Philippines to Turkey, Shrewsbury to Lebanon, AGM to Jack Straw nationally and internationally, from a socialist perspective. It holds frequent public Keeping it in the family ...................................................... 11 meetings and conducts educational Young Legal Aid Lawyers’ regular column from Laura Janes programmes. The Haldane Society is independent of any Reiding between the lines .......................................... 12 political party. Membership comprises Michael Mansfield QC on the prisons crisis lawyers, academics, students and legal workers as well as trade union and labour Are we heading for ‘Gulag Britain’?...... 14 movement affiliates. Piers Mostyn catalogues the parlous state of our penal policy President: Michael Mansfield QC Vice Presidents: Kader Asmal; Children in need ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UK Justice Policy Review
    UK Justice Policy Review Volume 2 6 May 2011 to 5 May 2012 by Richard Garside and Arianna Silvestri Justice Policy Review About the authors Richard Garside is Director and Arianna Silvestri is Research and Volume 2 Policy Associate at the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies. 6 May 2011 to 5 May 2012 Acknowledgements by Richard Garside and Arianna Silvestri Our thanks go to Roger Grimshaw, Research Director at the Centre, for updating the Expenditure and Criminal Justice Populations data sections as well as the Year in Numbers in this volume of our Justice Policy Review. Our thanks also go to Samantha Harding, Research and Policy Intern at the Centre during 2012/13, for her invaluable assistance in checking the data in this report and to our other colleagues Rebecca Roberts and Tammy McGloughlin for their input and useful comments during the drafting and production processes and to Steve Swingler, our designer. It would not have been possible to compile some of the figures in this report without the information and advice provided by the people who clarified the complexities of some of the data and helped us deal with the differences between jurisdictions. In particular we are grateful to Pól Callaghan, Head of Information and Policy at Citizens Advice Northern Ireland and Rachel Peto, Analysis Manager at Citizens Advice England and Wales for their assistance with regards to the Housing and wider social circumstances section; to Toby Cottrell, at the Probation and Contracted Services Directorate, National Offender Management Service for his assistance on Probation Trusts spending and to Mike Docherty, Intelligence Manager, Scottish Social Services Council, for his patient advice and insight into the intricacies of some of the criminal justice staffing data, both areas presented in our Staffing and outsourcing section.
    [Show full text]
  • Communications Privacy and Surveillance: References Winter
    Communications Privacy and Surveillance: References Winter Semester 2013-14 / Summer Semester 2014 Version 13 2014-03-04 New in this Version: • New material 1st February - 4rd March • Reason for a new version: important policy statement by UK Deputy PM New in the 11th & 12th Versions • New material 16th January – 3rd March 2014 This document constitutes a commented list of some articles, mainly from the Guardian and the New York Times, about the NSA and GCHQ surveillance of digital communications revealed by Edward Snowden, as well as some original source documents and other material. I am assembling it for the Communications Privacy and Surveillance seminar I am holding at the University of Bielefeld. Bruce Schneier's Crypto-Gram newsletter has a more complete list of articles from all over, although all of the Guardian articles he lists appear here. Bruce has worked with the journlaist Glenn Greenwald and the Guardian; he has seen substantial amounts of the material from Edward Snowden's document cache. As far as I know, he is the only digital-security professional not associated with the NSA or GCHQ who has seen the Snowden material. The material Bruce Schneier has published on the matter in his monthly newsletter is substantial and takes some time to read and I do recommend that readers of this document also read Schneier. Crypto-Gram contains many technical articles atttempting to assess the exact functioning and the likely effects of various named NSA and GCHQ programs. Its links offer a more diverse commentary that this document; however, there are references here which do not appear there, although I do not claim to be anywhere near complete on the stories.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Andrew Burrows Appointed to the Supreme Court 'Remembering Rwanda' Wins Award New Law and Technology Course Reproductive Health and Human Rights
    2020 No 23 The 'Future of Plastics' Project Andrew Burrows appointed to the Supreme Court 'Remembering Rwanda' wins award New Law and Technology Course Reproductive Health and Human Rights FACULTY OF L AW Editor: Clare Oxenbury-Palmer Designed by: windrushgroup.co.uk Printed by: Oxford University Press The Oxford Law News is published annually Dean’s Letter CONTENTS by the Faculty of Law, University of Oxford This will be my last Dean’s Dean’s Letter 3 Cover photos: Plastic pollution in ocean environmental Letter in the Law News 4-8 problem. Turtles can eat plastic bags News, because Student News 9 mistaking them for jellyfish by Richard Carey on Adobe Stock my term of office Water efficiency in the public sector 10-11 Andrew Burrows comes to an end Can the law help us to relate to each other better? 12-13 Data – Law and Technology in September of ‘Remembering Rwanda’ Team at the Oxford Human Rights Hub: ‘Shaping the Future’ 14-15 VCPER awards Bayush and her friends this year. Law Faculty Blogs 16-18 in Ethiopia Photographer Jessica Lea Department for Photo: Piranha Photography Erasmus+ and the Oxford Law Faculty 19 International Development Access & Outreach 20-21 New Faculty members 22-23 I always expected the job to be challenging, and so both those who read law at Oxford and those who did it has proved, but no-one could have foreseen the something else and ended up pursuing a career in law. Farewell 24 turmoil of the past few weeks, as we have confronted I have loved hearing your stories about Oxford – your the Coronavirus pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT 2017-18 OPENING DAY 2018 WELCOME FROM THE DIRECTOR The establishment of the That uncertainty is generated The Bonavero Institute’s We shall support world- Bonavero Institute would in part because the post-war link with the Faculty of Law class research in the field not have happened without commitments to fostering provides great advantages of human rights law and the generosity of our many peace, human rights, the to the Institute. It enables promote public engagement benefactors. It would also rule of law and international the Institute to collaborate in, and understanding of never have been realised institutions today are with the outstanding legal human rights law. In this, our without the extraordinary under threat from many scholars in the Faculty, many first Annual Report, you will drive and vision of Baroness quarters. The establishment of whom are leaders in learn about the programmes, Helena Kennedy QC, the of an institute dedicated to human rights and public projects and research that we Principal of Mansfield human rights research at the law research. have begun in our first year College, and the support University of Oxford is thus of operation, as well as about of the Fellows of Mansfield both timely and auspicious, The Bonavero Institute seeks our growing community. and the Faculty of Law at for it reminds us that our to bring those engaged the University of Oxford. world is made and shaped by in human rights research Kate O’Regan, Director We are grateful to them for human beings. The founders and human rights practice all their contributions and of this Institute have acted together to establish a commitment to building to support and strengthen creative conversation that a new Institute dedicated the commitment to human will foster the promotion and to human rights in our rights, peace and the rule protection of human rights uncertain world.
    [Show full text]
  • UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT of ORAL EVIDENCE to Be Published As HC 903-Ii
    UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 903-ii HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT PHONE HACKING TUESDAY 19 JULY 2011 RUPERT MURDOCH and JAMES MURDOCH REBEKAH BROOKS Evidence heard in Public Questions 151 - 580 USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others. 2. Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings. 3. Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant. 4. Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee. 1 Oral Evidence Taken before the Culture, Media and Sport on Tuesday 19 July 2011 Members present: Mr John Whittingdale (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey Damian Collins Philip Davies Paul Farrelly Cathy Jamieson Alan Keen Louise Mensch Mr Adrian Sanders Jim Sheridan Mr Tom Watson Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, News Corporation, and James Murdoch, Chairman, News International, gave evidence. James Murdoch: Mr Chairman, I have a procedural question, if it pleases you. Our understanding was that we would be afforded the opportunity to make an opening statement, and we prepared on that basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Crown Prosecution Service Annual Report and Resource Accounts 2008-09
    Crown Prosecution Service Annual Report and Resource Accounts 2008-09 The Crown Prosecution Service Annual Report and Resource Accounts 2008-09 Annual Report and Resource Accounts for the period April 2008 - March 2009 From the Director of Public Prosecutions to the Attorney General Resources Accounts presented to the House of Commons pursuant to section 6(4) of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000. Departmental Report presented to the House of Commons by Command of Her Majesty Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 9 July 2009 HC446 LONDON : The Stationery Office £26.60 © Crown Copyright 2009 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 9780102961966 The Crown Prosecution Service Annual Report and Resource Accounts 2008-09 Contents Director’s letter to the Attorney General 02 - 03 Introduction 04 - 05 Summary of performance and achievements 06 - 07 CSR 2007 progress on delivery 08 - 13 Improving performance in the magistrates’ courts 14 -
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles Msc Criminology
    FACULTY OF LAW MSC CRIMINOLOGY PROFILES CLASS OF 2017/18 VICTOR CHATELAIS FRANCE [email protected] PARALEGAL, CLYDE & CO, UK MSc Criminology Profile St Cross College Assisting the Energy and Natural Resources Department C French on documents disclosure EDUCATION INTERN, SUBSEA7, UK UNIVERSITY OF RENNES I, FRANCE, LLM EUROPEAN Class of 2017/18 Assisting the Compliance Department on document LAW (06/2017) review UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, ENGLAND, LLB ENGLISH AND CAREER ASPIRATIONS FRENCH LAW (06/2017) Criminal law INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE PROGRAMME Graduated magna cum laude ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Currently enrolled on a distance learning Bachelor in Oxford Criminology I would like to extend a warm welcome to our MSc Criminology INTERN, NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT, FRANCE Philosophy from Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense - Paris X, due to be completed in 2019 is dedicated and Criminal Justice students for 2017/18. Our programme Assisting the Commodities Department on legal to delivering has an outstanding international reputation and equips students translation, document review, and legal research an innovative with an advanced understanding of crime and criminal justice. programme of Our students take courses in criminological theory and the criminological study of criminal justice, receive training in research design teaching and and methodology, and have the opportunity to take optional REBECCA CONCANNON UK research. Staff courses in a wide range of subject areas, including policing, [email protected] RELEVANT EXPERIENCE members are also sentencing, prisons, the sociology of punishment, crime and the Worcester College PRIVATE TUTOR, UK committed to public engagement. I am family, human rights, race and gender, youth justice, risk and security, and migration EDUCATION delighted to welcome our new class of and citizenship.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2008 – 2009
    INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PROSECUTORS ANNUAL REPORT 2008 – 2009 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PROSECUTORS ANNUAL REPORT 2008- 2009 Introduction This is the IAP's tenth formal Annual Report. As well as being available to participants at the General Meeting and to other members on request from the Secretary-General, it can be found on the IAP website (www.iap-association.org) Part 1 The IAP Year (the following reports are extracts of the full range of activities taken by members and officials of the IAP. For further information, you can access the newsletters that are issued quarterly to members which are available on the website together with the Annual Business plan) 13 th Annual Conference, Singapore The theme for the conference in 2008 was “New Technologies in Crime and Prosecution: Challenges and Opportunities”. This interesting and topical theme offered the International Association of Prosecutors the opportunity to invite external speakers to address the delegates, particularly from industry, which lent a different and broader perspective to the debate. Contributions were received from Microsoft, CISCO, eBay and Pay Pal, as well as a facilitated international expert panel led by Scott Warren of Kroll, which examined how some tough cybercrime cases had been resolved. It was clear that the Information Technology (IT) industry were keen to lock in to the IAP and prosecutors everywhere for everyone’s mutual benefit and in order to better combat the rising tide of criminality in this area, and this led neatly to the conference outcome (see below). The 13 th IAP Annual Conference was opened in the purpose-built and commodious Raffles Conference Centre, to the accompaniment of a drumming fanfare, by the Attorney-General for Singapore and conference host, Professor Walter Woon.
    [Show full text]