Crime and punishment in the wildlife trade - WWF UK

goods involved can be liable to forfeiture 103 . In the case of wildlife, CEMA provides two
avenues for punishing offenders. Penalties may be imposed for importing goods that are subject
to restriction or prohibition, provided that the person had the intent to evade the restriction or
prohibition 104 . Otherwise, and more commonly, sections 170 (1) and (2) CEMA can be
utilised 105 .
Both sections are also concerned with goods that are regulated and thus subject to restriction or
prohibition. In the case of wildlife, this could include a particular specimen or derivative that is
regulated by virtue of the EC Regulations.
Section 170 (1) – The offence is made out if:
• a person knowingly acquires possession or knowingly has any dealing with any goods
which have been imported contrary to a prohibition or restriction under any enactment;
• the person is proved to have done so with the intent to evade the prohibition or restriction.
Section 170 (2) – The offence is made out if:
• a person is, in relation to any goods, in any way knowingly concerned in any fraudulent
evasion or attempt at evasion of any prohibition or restriction in force under any enactment.
In relation to exporting, the offences are set out in Section 68 and provide for the forfeiture
of goods that have been attempted to be exported, should the offence be complete:
Section 68 (1) – The offence is made out if:
• a person exports goods or brings them to the UK to export, and that export would be
contrary to a restriction in an enactment in force and applies to the exporter, intending
exporter and even agents.
Section 68 (2) – The offence is made out if:
• a person is knowingly involved in the export or attempted export of goods contrary
to a restiction, with intent to evade that restriction.
In both situations the criminal burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt must be satisfied. This
relates to the fact that the offender was knowingly involved with intent to evade. There is the
accompanying need to prove the offender’s intent: if this cannot be done, no prosecution could
succeed. Mere proof of the commission of the act – for example the import or the export –
would not suffice as the offender’s state of mind (intent) must be proved. This is why the
seizure figures for goods, which can be seized regardless of intent, and the actual prosecution
figures may be seen to differ.
All CEMA offences can be summary or indictable offences. In the case of a summary
conviction, a defendant may be subject to a maximum of six month imprisonment and/or a fine
of £1,000 or three times the value of the goods, whichever is the greater. The penalties are
greater on indictment, attracting a term of imprisonment for up to seven years and/or an
unlimited fine.
103 s49 CEMA 1979.
104 s50.
105 s170(6) further provides for forfeiture if a person is found guilty under these provisions.
40