The use of the Internet

More documents

Recommendations

Info

34 THE USE OF THE INTERNET FOR TERRORIST PURPOSES 103. The Terrorism Act 2006 established (in its section 5) the offence of “committing acts in preparation for terrorism”. This section was designed to deal with cases in which individuals actively planning acts of terrorism were stopped before they completed or attempted a substantive terrorist act. 88 104. Section 5 has been particularly useful in “lone wolf” cases, in which an offender is acting alone, there is insufficient evidence to establish the basis of a conspiracy charge because it cannot be proven that more than one person was involved, or authorities do not know in detail the offence that was being planned. The offence does not require proof of an identifiable final act or acts of terrorism, but the prosecution must prove a specific intent to commit a terrorist act or to assist another to do so. Several individuals have been convicted of the offence in the United Kingdom and sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment, including life imprisonment. 89 105. The case of R v. Terence Roy Brown [2011] EWCA Crim 2751, is an example of the utility of provisions such as section 58. R v. Terence Roy Brown Terence Roy Brown, a citizen of the United Kingdom, ran an online business, in which he advertised and sold an annual edition of a CD-ROM that he called the “Anarchist’s Cookbook” (the title is nearly identical to that of a well-known book called The Anarchist Cookbook). Rather than a single publication, however, these discs contained 10,322 files, some of which were complete publications in their own right. These included terrorist manuals such as the Al-Qaida Manual and instructions for the manufacture of different forms of explosives and the construction of bombs. Other files consisted of instructions for making poisons, how to avoid attracting the attention of authorities when travelling and weaponshandling techniques. In an apparent effort to circumvent the law, Mr. Brown posted disclaimers on the website advertising the publication, stating that the instructions they contained might be illegal or dangerous to perform and were intended for “reading pleasure and historical value only”. It was clear on investigation that Mr. Brown was motivated purely by commercial incentives. It was also apparent that he deliberately had expanded his collection in the immediate aftermath of the July 2005 London bombs and had significantly increased his profit as a result. In March 2011, Mr. Brown was convicted of seven counts under the Terrorism Act 2000 (section 58) relating to the collection of information that could have been used to prepare or commit acts of terrorism, two counts under the Terrorism Act 2006 (section 2) relating to the dissemination of terrorist publications and an offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 relating to the transfer of criminal property (his use of the profits from his business). a 88 Ibid., p. 964. 89 Ibid.
CHAPTER III. POlICy AND lEGISlATIvE FRAMEwORKS The excuse raised by Mr. Brown at trial was that his activities amounted to no more than the lawful exercise of his right to freedom of expression in relation to material that was freely available on the Internet and that was similar in type, if not volume, to that sold by other online booksellers. The same points were raised during an unsuccessful application to appeal conviction, during which the court ruled that the restriction of Brown’s article 10 rights in relation to material that was likely to assist terrorists was justified and proportionate. The court also affirmed the discretion of the prosecuting authorities not to charge every individual who might have committed an offence, but to consider instead each case on its own merits. a “Businessman who published bomb-makers’ handbook ‘facing lengthy spell in jail’”, Daily Mail, 9 March 2011. Available from www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1364621/Businessman-published-bomb-makers-handbookfacing-lengthy-spell-jail.html#ixzz1j4gXbMLu. 106. The case is one of several, including R v. K [2008] QB 827 and R v. G [2010] 1 AC 43, in which the courts in the United Kingdom have clarified the jurisprudence surrounding the scope and application of section 58 of the Act, in the light of relevant human rights safeguards. 107. In addition to criminal offences under anti-terrorism legislation, authorities in the United Kingdom have, when circumstances require, used the offence of solicitation to successfully prosecute persons carrying out activities linked to terrorism. An example of this approach is the case of R v. Bilal Zaheer Ahmad, 90 in which the defendant was convicted of solicitation of murder. R v. Bilal Zaheer Ahmad This United Kingdom case is linked to, and followed, the 2010 case involving Roshanara Choudhry, who was sentenced to life imprisonment on 2 November 2010 for the attempted murder of Stephen Timms, a Member of Parliament. In a statement, Choudhry said she had decided to commit the offence approximately four weeks prior to the assault in May 2010 and had purchased two knives in preparation, one as a spare in case the first broke while she stabbed the victim. She told police that she had been watching Anwar al-Awalaki videos and Abdullah Azzam videos and had visited the website www.revolutionmuslim.com during her period of radicalization. This well-known site, which was hosted in the United States, contained material promoting violent jihad, including videos and speeches encouraging terrorism and weblinks to terrorist publications. On 1 November 2010, the defendant posted a link on his Facebook page to a news article about the Timms/Choudhry case, to which he added the following comment: 90 Nottingham Crown Court, 13 May 2011. 35
Page 1: The use of the Internet for terrori
Page 4 and 5: © United Nations, September 2012.
Page 7 and 8: Foreword Executive Director United
Page 9: Government of the United Kingdom Th
Page 12 and 13: C. Forensic data preservation and r
Page 15 and 16: Background Technology is one of the
Page 17 and 18: I. Use of the Internet for terroris
Page 19 and 20: CHAPTER I. USE OF THE INTERNET FOR
Page 29 and 30: II. The international context II. A
Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER II. THE INTERNATIONAl CONTE
Page 39: CHAPTER II. THE INTERNATIONAl CONTE
Page 42 and 43: 28 THE USE OF THE INTERNET FOR TERR
Page 98 and 99:
84 THE USE OF THE INTERNET FOR TERR
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 115 and 116:
VI. Prosecutions VI. A. Introductio
Page 117 and 118:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS 344. In ot
Page 119 and 120:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS 354. While
Page 121 and 122:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS terrorists
Page 123 and 124:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS 371. In in
Page 125 and 126:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS challenges
Page 127 and 128:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS Messages w
Page 129 and 130:
Trial outcome CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTI
Page 131 and 132:
CHAPTER vI. PROSECUTIONS the Intern
Page 133 and 134:
(c) Ensuring that the expert uses a
Page 135:
2. The need for enhanced training a
Page 138 and 139:
124 THE USE OF THE INTERNET FOR TER
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156:
show all

The use of the Internet

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?