DOCSLIB.ORG

Download (1MB)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download (1MB) Kennedy, Lewis (2020) Should there be a Separate Scottish Law of Treason? PhD thesis. https://theses.gla.ac.uk/81656/ Copyright and moral rights for this work are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This work cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Enlighten: Theses https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] SHOULD THERE BE A SEPARATE SCOTTISH LAW OF TREASON? Lewis Kennedy, Advocate (MA, LLB, Dip LP, LLM) Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Law College of Social Sciences University of Glasgow September 2020 Abstract: Shortly after the Union, the Treason Act 1708 revoked Scotland’s separate treason law in favour of England’s treason law. Historically, English treason law was imposed on Scots criminal law and was not always sensitive to the differences in Scottish legal institutions and culture. A review of the law of treason is in contemplation, it being under general attention more than at any time since the end of World War II. If there were to be a revival of UK treason law, the creation of a separate Scottish treason law may be a logical development given Scotland’s evolving devolution settlement. The thesis attempts to answer the question whether there should be a new, distinct, Scottish law of treason. If so, how might it be reformed for the modern era, refined for the Scottish context, and fit into the devolved system? An essentially ‘black-letter’ approach has been adopted – considering this issue in a strictly law-centred and legalistic manner – while making appropriate allowance for external factors such as policy and political considerations. Based on my normative evaluation of treason law, this thesis puts forward an argument that though current treason law is problematic, there is still justification for it. My original contribution to knowledge is to demonstrate how it can be rendered relevant for the modern Scottish context. Firstly, I argue that allegiance, traditionally at the heart of treason law, seems archaic and suggest the ways in which it can be modernised and reconstructed. The primary resources for doing so can be found in the Lauterpacht and Williams debate which followed Joyce. Treason’s core duty of allegiance can be re-interpreted in terms of Williams’ duty- based contractual model. Building on that modelling, a negative duty of allegiance (or duty of non- betrayal) emerges. Secondly, while thinking of treason to the UK as a general offence of breaking the bond of allegiance, there is room for a more Scottish inflexion in the way in which the offence might apply. This includes a Scottish political object of allegiance – incorporating Scottish political institutions as a complementary focus for potential allegiance – specifically, the Crown-in-Scotland. Its essential elements – actus reus, jurisdiction, mens rea and operable defences – can be recalibrated for any such revised allegiance model, with suitable Scottish inflexion. With this analysis, only a limited range of betraying acts emerges. Its actus reus can be reframed in terms of a construct grounded in ‘Adherence Treason’, referable to a national security harm principle and insisting that its commission involves providing material assistance to the enemy. The negative duty is underlined by removal of the commission of treason by only omission. Referencing the Draft Scottish Criminal Code, express statutory recognition might be made for the operation of the general common law defences of necessity, coercion and obeying superior orders. Its exceptional character commends provision for new specific statutory defences with contemporary resonance – including a ‘Public Interest Defence’, ‘Government Whistleblowing Defence’ and the Australian ‘Humanitarian Defence’. Formulating a Scottish treason law might provide a suitable template for UK reform. But this is more than a pragmatic justification. Though not materially different in terms of its offence 1 elements, its defence elements should reflect a principled Scottish deviation in the availability of common law defences of necessity, coercion and obeying superior orders. 2 Acknowledgements I should like to recognise and express my sincere thanks to my supervisors, Lindsay Farmer, and James Chalmers, for their considerable guidance, encouragement, and patience during the course of this journey. They have provided invaluable direction and constructive insight and I have been most fortunate in receiving the level of support which I experienced. In addition, I should like to acknowledge my gratitude to the members of the examining panel who carried out their duties in the evaluation of this dissertation and conducted the viva voce as part of the final assessment of this thesis. Special thanks to Sabina Siebert for her insightful comments. Finally, I have to mention how much support and encouragement I have received from the members of my family, as well as their expertise in proof reading throughout the process and especially in relation to their detailed editing of the final draft. Thank you also to Caroline for resolving last-minute IT glitches. 3 Table of Contents Author’s Declaration .............................................................................................................. 5 Chapter 1 – Introduction ........................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 2 – Towards a Modern Duty of Allegiance – The Allegiance Question ................ 36 Chapter 3 – Actus Reus – Towards a Modern Scottish Formulation ................................... 74 Chapter 5 – Defences ......................................................................................................... 154 Chapter 6 – Conclusion and Recommendations: ............................................................... 196 Appendix: ........................................................................................................................... 213 Table of Authorities and Bibliography .............................................................................. 217 4 Author’s Declaration: I declare that, except where explicit reference is made to the contribution of others, that this dissertation is the result of my own work and has not been submitted for any other degree at the University of Glasgow or any other institution. Name: Lewis Kennedy Signature: __________________________ 5 Chapter 1 – Introduction I. Context II. Value of Scottish Treason Law III. Relevance of Treason Law (i) ‘Fair Labelling’ and Moral Wrong of Betrayal (ii) Legal Certainty (iii) Moral Duty to Prosecute Home-grown Traitors (iv) Improving Risk Management for IE Offenders (v) Vengeance and Retribution IV. Problems with Reviving Treason Law (i) Treason, the Anachronism (ii) ‘Patriotic’/Nationalistic Treason – ‘The (British) Empire Striking Back’ (iii) Undue Deference to Monarchy (iv) Discredited by Historical Abuses (v) Ample Alternatives (vi) Peacetime Irrelevance V. Making Scottish Treason Law Relevant 6 I. Context: British treason law appears to be irrelevant. Treason is not addressed in the (Scottish) Jury Manual. Gordon’s Criminal Law provides only the most cursory consideration and was not intended as a modern reappraisal. The editors of Archbold have omitted it from all editions after 2009, declaring: "it seems unlikely that there will be any such prosecutions in the foreseeable future".1 The Law Commission’s distant 1977 Working Paper on modernising the law of offences against the state was never implemented.2 There is a paucity of contemporary sources and no recent precedent explaining how its core concepts might be defined in terms which are fit for purpose – though its continuing existence is expressly recognised by amending legislation and tentative allusions in case law.3 The literature is scant and it has received relatively little academic attention in this country. It is no longer part of any Scottish undergraduate course syllabus on criminal law. The tendency to ignore it in theorising about criminal law and explaining the general elements of criminal liability evidences its atavistic character.4 Although not formally abolished and remaining in the law, it plays a greatly restricted role. Even if not technically obsolete, current treason law appears to be regarded as no longer relevant – problematic even. It has lost its normative appeal and practical efficacy.5 Policy Exchange, a centre-right think tank, expressed concerns in their 2018 paper Aiding the Enemy that the existing law of treason is not a secure basis on which to bring prosecutions – that it is unfit for purpose, unworkable and should be updated.6 Confident of long-standing external security and internal stability, we have managed successfully without treason prosecutions. There may have been a reluctance to prosecute what was until 1998 a 1 Archbold: Criminal Practice and Pleading, Evidence and Practice 2020, para. 25-1 – though this is less emphatic than the suggestion in previous editions that it was "unlikely in the extreme that there will … be any such prosecutions." 2 Law Commission,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Full Reservoir Level of 630 Feet
    y k y cm SERO TESTS IN CITY SPIKE IN CHILD LABOUR KAMALA ‘NOT COMPETENT’ About 1,200 samples have been collected Survey finds child labour has increased by a Kamala Harris is “not competent” to be by the RMRC in 2nd round of sero sizeable 105 per cent during lockdown president, says US President Donald Trump tests in 2 days DOWNTOWN | P3 period in West Bengal TWO STATES | P7 INTERNATIONAL | P10 VOLUME 10, ISSUE 149 | www.orissapost.com BHUBANESWAR | SUNDAY, AUGUST 30 | 2020 12 PAGES + SUNDAY POST | `4.00 IRREGULAR by MANJUL NO LOCAL LOCKDOWNS UNLOCK 4.0: States can’t impose any local lockdown outside the containment zones without prior consultation with the Centre AGENCIES Social, aca- The Ministry added that there shall demic, sports, en- be no restriction on inter-state and AMIT SHAH RECOVERS Instead of paying us one lakh to New Delhi, August 29: The Union tertainment, cul- intra-state movement of persons and NEW DELHI: Union Mahanadi tribunal asks publish your book, pay us two lakh to Home Ministry Saturday issued the tural, religious, goods, and no separate permission/ e- Home Minister reject it. It will give you better publicity Unlock 4.0 guidelines under which the political functions permit will be re- Amit Shah has state governments shall not impose and other con- quired for recovered and will states to submit data to any local lockdown outside the con- gregations such move- be discharged tainment zones without prior consul- will be per- ments dur- from the All India Black Panther actor tation with the Central government.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenges of Migration
    The Centre for Enterprise, Markets and Ethics ENTERPRISE AND VALUES SERIES The Challenges of Migration Andrei Rogobete The Centre for Enterprise, Markets and Ethics We are a think tank based in Oxford that seeks to promote an enterprise, market economy built on ethical foundations. Copyright © 2018, Andrei Rogobete We undertake research on the interface of Christian theology, economics Copyright © 2018: this edition, The Centre for Enterprise, Markets and and business. Ethics Our aim is to argue the case for an economy that generates wealth, The moral rights of the author have been asserted. employment, innovation and enterprise within a framework of calling, All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be integrity, values and ethical behaviour, leading to the transformation of the reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written business enterprise and contributing to the relief of poverty. permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a We publish a range of material, hold events and conferences, undertake book review. research projects and speak and teach in the areas with which we are Scripture quotations are from New Revised Standard Version Bible: concerned. Anglicized Edition, copyright © 1989, 1995 National Council of the We are independent and a registered charity entirely dependent on Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. donations for our work. All rights reserved. Our website is www.theceme.org. For further information please
    [Show full text]
  • Wellbeing in Four Policy Areas
    Wellbeing in four policy areas Report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Wellbeing Economics September 2014 The All Party Parliamentary Group on Wellbeing Economics was set up to: • Provide a forum for discussion of wellbeing issues and public policy in Parliament • Promote enhancement of wellbeing as an important government goal • Encourage the adoption of wellbeing indicators as complimentary measures of progress to GDP • Promote policies designed to enhance wellbeing. The New Economics Foundation (NEF) provides the secretariat to the group. Contents Foreword 2 Summary 3 1. Introduction: Scope of the inquiry 9 2. A wellbeing approach to policy: What it means and why it matters 10 3. Building a high wellbeing economy: Labour market policy 18 4. Building high wellbeing places: Planning and transport policy 24 5. Building personal resources: Mindfulness in health and education 30 6. Valuing what matters: Arts and culture policy 36 7. Conclusion 42 Appendix: List of expert witnesses 43 References 45 2 DiversityWellbeing and in fourIntegration policy areas Foreword It is now eight years since David Cameron first declared: ‘it’s time we focused not just on GDP, but on GWB – general wellbeing’,1 and five years since the influential Commission on the Measurement of Progress, chaired by Joseph Stiglitz, argued that we need to ‘shift emphasis from measuring economic production to measuring people’s wellbeing’.2 As we near the end of the first parliament in which the UK has begun systematically measuring national wellbeing – becoming a global leader in the process – now is a timely moment to take stock of this agenda and ask what needs to happen next.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand1
    Abusive and Offensive Communications: the criminal law of New Zealand1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This paper details the myriad criminal laws New Zealand has in place to deal with abusive and offensive communication. These range from old laws, such as blasphemy and incitement, to recent laws enacted specifically to deal with online communications. It will be apparent that, unfortunately, New Zealand’s criminal laws now support different approaches to online and offline speech. SPECIFIC LIABILITY FOR ONLINE COMMUNICATION: THE HARMFUL DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS ACT 2015 The statutory regime 1.2 The most recent government response to abusive and offensive speech is the Harmful Digital Communications Act, which was passed in 2015. The Act was a response to cyberbullying, and based on a report by the New Zealand Law Commission which found that one in ten New Zealand internet users have experienced harmful communications on the internet.2 It contains a criminal offence and a civil complaints regime administered by an approved agency, Netsafe. The Agency focusses on mediating the complaint and seeking voluntary take-down if appropriate, but has no powers to make orders. If the complaint cannot be resolved at this level, the complainant may take the matter to the District Court.3 Although the Act has both criminal and civil components, they are both described below in order to capture the comprehensiveness of the approach to online publication of harmful material. 1.3 The regime is based on a set of Digital Communication Principles, which are: Principle 1 A digital communication should not disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
    [Show full text]
  • Secret Evidence
    a JUSTICE report SECRET EVIDENCE Advancing access to justice, human rights and the rule of law Secret Evidence June 2009 For further information contact Eric Metcalfe, Director of Human Rights Policy email: [email protected] direct line: 020 7762 6415 JUSTICE, 59 Carter Lane, London EC4V 5AQ tel: 020 7329 5100 fax: 020 7329 5055 email: [email protected] website: www.justice.org.uk Contents Executive summary 5 Acknowledgements 6 Introduction 7 Key terms 9 - closed evidence and secret evidence 9 - closed hearings 9 - ex parte hearings 9 - hearings in camera 10 - undisclosed material 11 - departures from open evidence: anonymity, redactions and gisting 12 Part 1: The right to a fair hearing 14 The right to be heard 15 The right to confront one’s accuser 18 The right to an adversarial trial and equality of arms 23 The right to be informed of the accusation 27 The presumption of innocence 28 The right to counsel 30 Article 6 ECHR 31 - article 6(1) 31 - article 6(2) 33 - article 6(3) 33 Article 5(4) ECHR 34 Part 2: Secret evidence in civil cases 36 The Special Immigration Appeals Commission 37 - Chahal v United Kingdom 38 - The 1997 Act 40 - Proceedings pre-9/11 42 - Proceedings post-9/11 48 - Torture evidence 56 - Proceedings post-7/7 59 - MK v Secretary of State 69 - A and others v United Kingdom 73 Control order hearings 76 - Secretary of State v MB 78 - AE, AF and AN v Secretary of State 84 Parole board hearings 91 - Roberts v Parole Board 92 Other civil proceedings 101 - Administrative tribunals 102 - ASBO hearings 104 - Asset
    [Show full text]
  • High Treason
    11th October 2017 High Treason The first Treason Act in England was enacted by Parliament at the time of Edward III in 1351, which codified the common law of Treason and contained most of acts defined as Treason. It is still in force but has been very significantly amended (Wikipedia - Treason Act 1351). The main definitions relate to any person planning or imagined: “to harm the King or his immediate family, his sons and heirs or their companions; levying war against the King, plus actions against the King's officials, counterfeiting the Great Seal. Privy Seal or coinage of the realm.” The definitions also included that any person who "adhered to the King's enemies in his Realm, giving them aid and comfort in his Realm or elsewhere was guilty of High Treason" The penalty for these offences at the time was Hanging, Drawing and Quartering. The Act is still in force today (without the "drawing and quartering part") The Act was last used to prosecute William Joyce in 1945, who was subsequently hanged for collaborating with Germany during WWII More recently the Treason Felony Act (1848) declared that It is treason felony to: "compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend: • to deprive the Queen of her crown, • to levy war against the Queen, or • to "move or stir" any foreigner to invade the United Kingdom or any other country belonging to the Queen.” Blair and the New Labour government enacted The Crime and Disorder Act (1998) which amended The Treason Felony Act (1848) and formally abolished the death penalty for the last offences carrying it, namely treason and piracy.
    [Show full text]
  • [Charles Donahue, Jr.,] 'An Historical Argument For
    [Charles Donahue, Jr.,] ‘An Historical Argument for Right to Counsel During Police Interrogation’, Yale Law Journal, 73 (1964) 1000–1057. This item is under copyright (copyright © 1964 The Yale Law Journal Company). You may download for private, non-commercial use; you may distribute it to your students for a fee no more than copying costs; you may not put it on the web (links are fine). If the item has been published, you may cite or quote it within the limits of “fair use.” If it has not been published, you may not cite or quote it without my express permission. Charles Donahue, Jr. AN HISTORICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL DURING POLICE INTERROGATION INTRODUCTION Escobedo v. IllinoisI raises once more before the Supreme Court the prob- lem of the right to counsel during police interrogation. The facts of the case are typical of several which have arisen during the past ten years. Danny Escobedo, a twenty-two year old man of Mexican extraction, was suspected of murdering his brother-in-law. The police brought Mr. Escobedo to the station and proceeded to interrogate him. When he asked to be allowed to speak to his attorney, the police refused. Later his attorney appeared at the station showing the desk sergeant the Illinois statute which requires that anyone held in custody be allowed to see his attorney "except in cases of im- minent danger of escape.' 2 The attorney caught sight of Escobedo, warned him by sign to keep silent but was not allowed to speak to him. The interroga- tion lasted about three hours.
    [Show full text]
  • In Scots Law
    1 When the Exception is the Rule: Rationalising the ‘Medical Exception’ in Scots Law 2 I. INTRODUCTION No medical practitioner who performs a legitimate medical operation on a patient (in the course of competently carrying out the duties of their profession)1 commits a delict or a criminal offence.2 This is so in spite of the fact that to infringe the bodily integrity of another person is plainly both a crime3 and a civil wrong.4 Notwithstanding the fact that the patient may desire the operation, the ‘defence’ of consent cannot possibly justify the serious injuries intentionally inflicted in the course of an operation to effect a kidney transplant, or to amputate a limb, or even to insert a stent, since these procedures are highly invasive and effect irreversible changes to the physicality of the patient(s).5 The ‘medical exception’ has consequently and consistently been invoked by legal commentators when considering cases of invasive surgery, or procedures which involve serious wounding.6 Since consent is no defence to serious assault,7 this exception to the general rule that to inflict such is to commit a crime must be justified by means other than an appeal to the 1 ‘Proper’ medical treatment is a prerequisite: Margaret Brazier and Sara Fovargue, Transforming Wrong into Right: What is ‘Proper Medical Treatment’?, in Sara Fovargue and Alexandra Mullock, The Legitimacy of Medical Treatment: What Role for the Medical Exception, (London: Routledge, 2016), p.12 2 See, generally, Sara Fovargue and Alexandra Mullock, The Legitimacy of Medical Treatment: What Role for the Medical Exception, (London: Routledge, 2016), passim.
    [Show full text]
  • Difficulties with Drug Conspiracies in Singapore: Can You Conspire to Traffic Drugs to Yourself?
    UCLA UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal Title Difficulties With Drug Conspiracies in Singapore: Can You Conspire to Traffic Drugs to Yourself? Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/30x226bn Journal UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal, 37(1) Author Yang, Kenny Publication Date 2020 DOI 10.5070/P8371048805 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California DIFFICULTIES WITH DRUG CONSPIRACIES IN SINGAPORE: Can You Conspire to Traffic Drugs to Yourself? Kenny Yang Abstract If Person A delivers drugs to Person B at the latter’s request, Person A is liable for drug trafficking—a serious offense in many jurisdictions. However, the liability of Person B for drug trafficking is unclear as much may depend on Person B’s intention with the drugs. The Singaporean Courts recently had to grapple with this issue in Liew Zheng Yang v. Public Prosecutor and Ali bin Mohamad Bahashwan v. Public Prosecu- tor and other appeals. Prior to these two cases, the position in Singapore was clear—Person B should be liable for drug trafficking as an accessory to Person A, in line with Singapore’s strong stance against drug offenses. However, since these cases, the Singaporean Courts have taken a con- trary position and held that Person B may not be liable if the drugs were for his/her own consumption. This Article examines the law with respect to this drug conspiracy offense in Singapore, looking at its history, the primary legislation and similar cases. It also scrutinizes the judicial reasoning in the two cases above and considers whether this can be reconciled with the Courts’ prior position on the issue.
    [Show full text]
  • What If the Founders Had Not Constitutionalized the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus?
    THE COUNTERFACTUAL THAT CAME TO PASS: WHAT IF THE FOUNDERS HAD NOT CONSTITUTIONALIZED THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS? AMANDA L. TYLER* INTRODUCTION Unlike the other participants in this Symposium, my contribution explores a constitutional counterfactual that has actually come to pass. Or so I will argue it has. What if, this Essay asks, the Founding generation had not constitutionalized the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus? As is explored below, in many respects, the legal framework within which we are detaining suspected terrorists in this country today—particularly suspected terrorists who are citizens1—suggests that our current legal regime stands no differently than the English legal framework from which it sprang some two-hundred-plus years ago. That framework, by contrast to our own, does not enshrine the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus as a right enjoyed by reason of a binding and supreme constitution. Instead, English law views the privilege as a right that exists at the pleasure of Parliament and is, accordingly, subject to legislative override. As is also shown below, a comparative inquiry into the existing state of detention law in this country and in the United Kingdom reveals a notable contrast—namely, notwithstanding their lack of a constitutionally- based right to the privilege, British citizens detained in the United Kingdom without formal charges on suspicion of terrorist activities enjoy the benefit of far more legal protections than their counterparts in this country. The Essay proceeds as follows: Part I offers an overview of key aspects of the development of the privilege and the concept of suspension, both in England and the American Colonies, in the period leading up to ratification of the Suspension Clause as part of the United States Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulations As to Intrants Faculty of Advocates
    REGULATIONS AS TO INTRANTS FACULTY OF ADVOCATES July 2009 Edition REGULATIONS AS TO INTRANTS 31 July 1996 (As amended March 2004 and December 2006) FACULTY OF ADVOCATES 2 CONTENTS Page Introduction Procedure for Admission as an Intrant 4 Fees Payable by Intrants 6 Regulations General Regulations for Admission 7 Exemptions 12 Rights and Restrictions 17 Interpretation 18 Appendices A. List of Subjects Covered by Faculty Examinations 19 B. Rules for Conduct of Faculty Examinations 20 C. Admission Days 22 D. Certificates re Criminal Convictions and Proceedings, etc. 23 E. Transitional Provisions in Relation to the 24 Requirement of a Diploma in Legal Practice in Regulation 3(1)(b) F. Transitional Provisions in Relation to the 25 Requirement in Regulation 6(6) in respect of Entry Money G. Rules for dealing with objections made to the 26 admission to Membership of the Faculty of Candidates for Admission or Intrants in terms of Regulation 6(4) H. Aptitude Test 29 I. Transitional Provisions in Relation to the commencement 30 of pupillage before 31 December 1997 J. Transitional Provisions in Relation to the requirements 31 of Regulations 2(1)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) 3 INTRODUCTION A candidate for admission to the Faculty is known as an "Intrant". The Clerk of Faculty is the officer responsible for advising Intrants and prospective Intrants about the procedure and requirements for admission to the Faculty. All enquiries should be addressed to: - The Clerk of Faculty Advocates' Library Parliament House Edinburgh, EH1 1RF Procedure for Admission of an Intrant An Advocate is not only a member of the Faculty of Advocates but also a member of the College of Justice and an officer of the Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Law Act 1977
    Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to Criminal Law Act 1977. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Criminal Law Act 1977 1977 CHAPTER 45 An Act to amend the law of England and Wales with respect to criminal conspiracy; to make new provision in that law, in place of the provisions of the common law and the Statutes of Forcible Entry, for restricting the use or threat of violence for securing entry into any premises and for penalising unauthorised entry or remaining on premises in certain circumstances; otherwise to amend the criminal law, including the law with respect to the administration of criminal justice; to provide for the alteration of certain pecuniary and other limits; to amend section 9(4) of the Administration of Justice Act 1973, the Legal Aid Act 1974, the Rabies Act 1974 and the Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1975 and the law about juries and coroners’ inquests; and for connected purposes. [29th July 1977] Annotations: Editorial Information X1 The text of ss. 1–5, 14–49, 57, 58, 60–65, Schs. 1–9, 11–14 was taken from S.I.F. Group 39:1 (Criminal Law: General), ss. 51, 63(2), 65(1)(3)(7)(10) from S.I.F. Group 39:2 ( Criminal Law: Public Safety and Order), ss. 53, 54, 65(1)(3)(7)(9)(10) Group 39:5 (Criminal Law: Sexual Offences and Obscenity), ss.
    [Show full text]