Book chapter 3078 views
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security
Critical Perspectives on Counter-terrorism
Swansea University Author:
Stuart Macdonald
Abstract
The objective of the pursue strand of the UK’s CONTEST strategy is to reduce the terrorist threat to this country by disrupting terrorists and their operations. A number of methods of disruption are available, including: prosecution; deportation; proscription; seizing and freezing assets; and, Terro...
| Published in: | Critical Perspectives on Counter-terrorism |
|---|---|
| Published: |
Abingdon
Routledge
2014
|
| Online Access: |
http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415855471/ |
| URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa16646 |
| first_indexed |
2014-07-02T01:30:02Z |
|---|---|
| last_indexed |
2019-02-04T13:04:51Z |
| id |
cronfa16646 |
| recordtype |
SURis |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2019-02-04T10:40:42.5097285</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>16646</id><entry>2013-12-17</entry><title>Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>933e714a4cc37c3ac12d4edc277f8f98</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-7483-9023</ORCID><firstname>Stuart</firstname><surname>Macdonald</surname><name>Stuart Macdonald</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2013-12-17</date><deptcode>HRCL</deptcode><abstract>The objective of the pursue strand of the UK’s CONTEST strategy is to reduce the terrorist threat to this country by disrupting terrorists and their operations. A number of methods of disruption are available, including: prosecution; deportation; proscription; seizing and freezing assets; and, Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Of these, the CONTEST strategy states that the preferred method is prosecution. This chapter examines this so-called ‘priority of prosecution’. Examining the UK's raft of terrorism precursor offences and its self-imposed ban on the use of intercept as evidence, the chapter argues that in fact the emphasis placed on prosecution is equivocal and better understood as a manifestation of the priority that contemporary counterterrorism policies attach to national security.</abstract><type>Book chapter</type><journal>Critical Perspectives on Counter-terrorism</journal><publisher>Routledge</publisher><placeOfPublication>Abingdon</placeOfPublication><keywords>Counterterrorism, terrorism offences, pre-inchoate liability, intercept evidence, security</keywords><publishedDay>15</publishedDay><publishedMonth>10</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2014</publishedYear><publishedDate>2014-10-15</publishedDate><doi/><url>http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415855471/</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Hillary Rodham Clinton Law School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HRCL</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2019-02-04T10:40:42.5097285</lastEdited><Created>2013-12-17T10:22:15.1957146</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences</level><level id="2">Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Stuart</firstname><surname>Macdonald</surname><orcid>0000-0002-7483-9023</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807> |
| spelling |
2019-02-04T10:40:42.5097285 v2 16646 2013-12-17 Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security 933e714a4cc37c3ac12d4edc277f8f98 0000-0002-7483-9023 Stuart Macdonald Stuart Macdonald true false 2013-12-17 HRCL The objective of the pursue strand of the UK’s CONTEST strategy is to reduce the terrorist threat to this country by disrupting terrorists and their operations. A number of methods of disruption are available, including: prosecution; deportation; proscription; seizing and freezing assets; and, Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Of these, the CONTEST strategy states that the preferred method is prosecution. This chapter examines this so-called ‘priority of prosecution’. Examining the UK's raft of terrorism precursor offences and its self-imposed ban on the use of intercept as evidence, the chapter argues that in fact the emphasis placed on prosecution is equivocal and better understood as a manifestation of the priority that contemporary counterterrorism policies attach to national security. Book chapter Critical Perspectives on Counter-terrorism Routledge Abingdon Counterterrorism, terrorism offences, pre-inchoate liability, intercept evidence, security 15 10 2014 2014-10-15 http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415855471/ COLLEGE NANME Hillary Rodham Clinton Law School COLLEGE CODE HRCL Swansea University 2019-02-04T10:40:42.5097285 2013-12-17T10:22:15.1957146 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law Stuart Macdonald 0000-0002-7483-9023 1 |
| title |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| spellingShingle |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security Stuart Macdonald |
| title_short |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| title_full |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| title_fullStr |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| title_sort |
Prosecuting Suspected Terrorists: Precursor Crimes, Intercept Evidence and the Priority of Security |
| author_id_str_mv |
933e714a4cc37c3ac12d4edc277f8f98 |
| author_id_fullname_str_mv |
933e714a4cc37c3ac12d4edc277f8f98_***_Stuart Macdonald |
| author |
Stuart Macdonald |
| author2 |
Stuart Macdonald |
| format |
Book chapter |
| container_title |
Critical Perspectives on Counter-terrorism |
| publishDate |
2014 |
| institution |
Swansea University |
| publisher |
Routledge |
| college_str |
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences |
| hierarchytype |
|
| hierarchy_top_id |
facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences |
| department_str |
Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law |
| url |
http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415855471/ |
| document_store_str |
0 |
| active_str |
0 |
| description |
The objective of the pursue strand of the UK’s CONTEST strategy is to reduce the terrorist threat to this country by disrupting terrorists and their operations. A number of methods of disruption are available, including: prosecution; deportation; proscription; seizing and freezing assets; and, Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Of these, the CONTEST strategy states that the preferred method is prosecution. This chapter examines this so-called ‘priority of prosecution’. Examining the UK's raft of terrorism precursor offences and its self-imposed ban on the use of intercept as evidence, the chapter argues that in fact the emphasis placed on prosecution is equivocal and better understood as a manifestation of the priority that contemporary counterterrorism policies attach to national security. |
| published_date |
2014-10-15T03:29:43Z |
| _version_ |
1856979214734983168 |
| score |
11.096068 |

