5. <strong>Inchoate</strong> offences do not exist in isolati<strong>on</strong>. An inchoate offencecomes into existence <strong>on</strong>ly when it combines with <strong>on</strong>e or more of the specialpart offences. Attempt and incitement always attach to a crime. C<strong>on</strong>spiracyalways attaches to either a crime or an unlawful activity. Unlawful activityfor the purpose of c<strong>on</strong>spiracy has a particular meaning and is wider than“criminal”. It should be also noted that there are a number of c<strong>on</strong>spiracyoffences that are really special part offences. C<strong>on</strong>spiracy to defraud andc<strong>on</strong>spiracy to corrupt public morals are examples.6. Generally, if a new special part offence comes into existence, theninchoate offences relating to that substantive offence also come intoexistence. Suppose, for example, a new statutory offence of adultery isenacted. This would have the effect of creating inchoate offences ofattempting, inciting, and c<strong>on</strong>spiring to commit adultery. It is noted thatArticle 15.2.1° of the C<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> of Ireland vests exclusive law-makingpower in the Oireachtas. The process described in the adultery example heredoes not c<strong>on</strong>flict with Article 15 since it would be the Oireachtas, not judgescausing attempt, c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, and incitement to commit adultery to come intoexistence. Just as self-defence would be a defence to any new offenceenacted in the absence of the enacting statute providing otherwise, so toowould attempt, c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, and incitement relate to any new offence enacted.CScope of the project7. The label “inchoate offences” can be used to describe not justattempt, c<strong>on</strong>spiracy and incitement when they attach or relate to special partoffences, but also many special part offences that have the character ofcriminalising c<strong>on</strong>duct that leads to prohibited harm. Central examples ofspecial part offences that can reas<strong>on</strong>ably be called inchoate offences arepossessi<strong>on</strong> offences. 10 Possessi<strong>on</strong> of a knife in public 11 is a special partoffence <strong>on</strong> the statute book. Yet mere possessi<strong>on</strong> causes no actual prohibitedharm such as injury or the fear of attack. Carrying a knife may increase thelikelihood of criminal harm, or it may be thought that carrying a knife inpublic is a prelude to offences such as assault and robbery. By prohibitingmere possessi<strong>on</strong> in public, the law aims to stamp out c<strong>on</strong>duct leading tosubstantive criminal harm. Thus it has a similar functi<strong>on</strong> to attempt,c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, and incitement, though in this particular instance the special partinchoate offence (possessi<strong>on</strong> of a knife) catches c<strong>on</strong>duct further removedfrom the completi<strong>on</strong> of substantive criminal harm than criminal attemptliability would. Accordingly, this special part inchoate offence can bethought of as supplementing the general part inchoate offences.1011Another example is endangerment in secti<strong>on</strong> 13 of the N<strong>on</strong>-Fatal <strong>Offences</strong> Against thePers<strong>on</strong> Act 1997.Secti<strong>on</strong> 9 of the Firearms and Offensive Weap<strong>on</strong>s Act 1990.3
8. <strong>Inchoate</strong> liability in the wide sense means the attributi<strong>on</strong> ofcriminal liability for c<strong>on</strong>duct leading to, but not occasi<strong>on</strong>ing, the resultingharm that the criminal law prohibits. This includes special part inchoateoffences as well as the general part principles allowing for attempt,c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, and incitement to attach to special part offences. The narrowermeaning of inchoate liability includes <strong>on</strong>ly the latter – that is, attributingliability for attempting, inciting, or c<strong>on</strong>spiring to commit particular offences.This can be called relati<strong>on</strong>al liability. Relati<strong>on</strong>al liability is a subset ofinchoate liability. Relati<strong>on</strong>al liability is the focus of this <str<strong>on</strong>g>C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Paper</str<strong>on</strong>g>;it is c<strong>on</strong>cerned with attempt, incitement and c<strong>on</strong>spiracy as relati<strong>on</strong>al offencesthat attach to – and are entirely parasitic <strong>on</strong> – substantive special partoffences.9. Another note about the scope of this <str<strong>on</strong>g>C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Paper</str<strong>on</strong>g> is that itfocuses <strong>on</strong> the substantive law of general part inchoate offences. That is, thedescripti<strong>on</strong>s of the c<strong>on</strong>stituent parts of attempt, c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, and incitement.Significant procedural issues arise regarding these offences. There are rulesof evidence unique to c<strong>on</strong>spiracy, for example. These procedural issues arenot, however, within the scope of this <str<strong>on</strong>g>Paper</str<strong>on</strong>g>. Neither are questi<strong>on</strong>s ofpunishment for these offences. It is envisaged that by initially focusingexclusively <strong>on</strong> the substantive law of inchoate offences, the Commissi<strong>on</strong> canbest serve Ireland‟s process of codificati<strong>on</strong>. This takes account of therecommendati<strong>on</strong> of The Expert Group <strong>on</strong> Codificati<strong>on</strong> of the Criminal <strong>Law</strong>that the first phase of codificati<strong>on</strong> should include a comprehensive statementof general part principles 12 and this statement should not be cluttered withprocedural rules. 13DOutline of this <str<strong>on</strong>g>C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Paper</str<strong>on</strong>g>10. This <str<strong>on</strong>g>C<strong>on</strong>sultati<strong>on</strong></str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Paper</str<strong>on</strong>g> begins with discussi<strong>on</strong> of the relati<strong>on</strong>alinchoate offences and their place in the criminal law. It then proceeds toaddress attempt, c<strong>on</strong>spiracy and incitement. This particular sequencereflects a movement outwards from the occurrence of substantive criminalharm, attempt being closest to the completi<strong>on</strong> of a substantive special partoffence, incitement typically furthest away. 14121314Report of the Expert Group <strong>on</strong> the Codificati<strong>on</strong> of the Criminal <strong>Law</strong> Codifying theCriminal <strong>Law</strong> (Government Publicati<strong>on</strong>s 2004) at paragraph 2.86.Codifying the Criminal <strong>Law</strong> at paragraph 2.89.This sequence is used in a number of textbooks including Charlet<strong>on</strong>, McDermott, andBolger Criminal <strong>Law</strong> (Butterworths 1999), McAuley and McCutche<strong>on</strong>, CriminalLiability (Round Hall Press 2000) and Hanly An Introducti<strong>on</strong> to Irish Criminal <strong>Law</strong>(2 nd ed Gill & Macmillan 2006).4
- Page 1: Consultation <stro
- Page 4 and 5: Law Reform CommissionTHE LAW REFORM
- Page 6 and 7: Law Reform CommissionLaw Reform Res
- Page 8 and 9: Law Reform CommissionContact Detail
- Page 10 and 11: TABLE OF CONTENTSTable of Legislati
- Page 12: TABLE OF LEGISLATIONAbortion Act 19
- Page 15 and 16: Lajoie v R [1974] SCR 399 CanLeigh
- Page 17 and 18: R v O‟Brien [1954] SCR 666 CanR v
- Page 20 and 21: INTRODUCTIONABackground to the proj
- Page 24 and 25: 11. Chapter 1 explores the nature o
- Page 26 and 27: CHAPTER 1INCHOATE LIABILITYAIntrodu
- Page 28 and 29: its pure relational form as an agre
- Page 30 and 31: D(1) LegalityCriminal law theory en
- Page 32 and 33: 1.16 Some textbook writers reverse
- Page 34 and 35: one resulted in conviction by the j
- Page 36 and 37: 1.30 Evident here is a principled r
- Page 38: excusatory defences 51legitimate de
- Page 41 and 42: codifying inchoate offences will be
- Page 43 and 44: called “the proximity rule” to
- Page 45 and 46: Appeal, was because more than one i
- Page 47 and 48: accused for which she stood trial a
- Page 49 and 50: defendant had progressed well beyon
- Page 51 and 52: And it is costly to try - police an
- Page 53 and 54: and subsequently abolished in New Z
- Page 55 and 56: “proximate” was more like “ne
- Page 57 and 58: providing, bluntly, that attempting
- Page 59 and 60: unlawful entry of a structure, vehi
- Page 61 and 62: drafted by James Fitzjames Stephen,
- Page 63 and 64: 2.68 The Law Commission for England
- Page 65 and 66: crime; (2) an overt act toward the
- Page 67 and 68: (3) D commits an offence or an act
- Page 69 and 70: the Court of Criminal Appeal has ap
- Page 71 and 72: activity. Purposive activity is int
- Page 73 and 74:
a Working Party assisting the Law C
- Page 75 and 76:
consequences/circumstances distinct
- Page 77 and 78:
inchoate liability) because such pr
- Page 79 and 80:
Oireachtas has sole law-making powe
- Page 81 and 82:
either label could be applied to a
- Page 83 and 84:
2.135 Perhaps Walsh J, when imagini
- Page 85 and 86:
subjectivist approach to impossibil
- Page 87 and 88:
man carried away his own umbrella d
- Page 89 and 90:
just to make it look like he would
- Page 91 and 92:
ii)Having an abandonment defence gi
- Page 93 and 94:
i) The would-be perpetrator had a c
- Page 96 and 97:
3CHAPTER 3CONSPIRACYAIntroduction3.
- Page 98 and 99:
two or more persons involving resol
- Page 100 and 101:
3.12 The People (Attorney General)
- Page 102 and 103:
the Brighton Conspiracy Case 37 sta
- Page 104 and 105:
Henchy J went on to state, obiter,
- Page 106 and 107:
conspiracy is exempt from liability
- Page 108 and 109:
Subsequently, in R v Anderson, 73 t
- Page 110 and 111:
(b)(i)Non-criminal unlawfulnessTort
- Page 112 and 113:
“[A]n agreement by two or more by
- Page 114 and 115:
decency, which has an ancillary inc
- Page 116 and 117:
where they will fall in.” The ice
- Page 118 and 119:
abolishing the latter but not the f
- Page 120 and 121:
G(a)Abandonment of a conspiracyThe
- Page 122 and 123:
4CHAPTER 4INCITEMENTAIntroduction4.
- Page 124 and 125:
approach to that of the common law.
- Page 126 and 127:
(v)Incitement need not be directed
- Page 128 and 129:
verbs used to describe a physical a
- Page 130 and 131:
4.23 It is noted that while the act
- Page 132 and 133:
direction. The analysis of criminal
- Page 134 and 135:
(iii)Inciting non-criminal conduct4
- Page 136 and 137:
encouragement or assistance will in
- Page 138 and 139:
Convention on Human Rights. 75 Inci
- Page 140 and 141:
conduct incited. This position was
- Page 142 and 143:
5CHAPTER 5PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATIO
- Page 144 and 145:
(4) Impossible conspiracies5.21 The
- Page 146:
The Law Reform Commission is an ind