Criminalising pre-inchoate terrorism-related offences: redefining the limits of the criminal law?

Thesis

A large theoretical debate has developed about the extent to which preventive offences are consistent with the fundamental principles of the criminal law. Less has been said about the emergence in the UK of a more problematic category of offences- namely pre-inchoate terrorism-related offences, which impose liability for actions earlier in time even than preparatory offences. As one ‘moves back in time’ to impose inchoate liability and pre-inchoate liability, one reaches a point where it is difficult to fit pre-inchoate offences into a traditional framework of criminal responsibility for wrongful conduct done. Whereas once there was no liability for 'mere preparation' in criminal law, the proliferation of terrorism-related offences has not only criminalised 'any conduction in preparation for' giving effect to an intention to commit or assist another to commit acts of terrorism but also extended criminal liability to merely viewing on a single occasion material likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. The thesis enquires whether these terrorism-related offences are justified as the punishment of culpable wrongs, or whether terrorism-related offences like these fall outside the legitimate limits of the criminal law. By examining the move towards the criminalisation of pre-inchoate terrorism-related conduct, it contributes towards a more systematic and comprehensive understanding of the scope of preventive criminalisation. This allows for a reassessment of the constraints suggested by the current literature and case law in light of the existing approaches to the use of far-ranging terrorism-related offences as an arm of the preventive state. This thesis furthers an understanding of this important but under-researched area of the law to set out the legitimate limits of the criminalisation of pre-preparatory acts. This thesis contributes to the discussion as to how a fair balance between individual freedom and security can be reached.

Authors: Lee, F

• DOI: 10.5287/ora-mj585528k
• Type of award: DPhil
• Level of award: Doctoral
• Awarding institution: University of Oxford
• Language: English
• Keywords: criminal law; terrorism; inchoate offences
• Subjects: Law