6
On the latter proposal, Mr Mathews noted that the LRC recommended the abolition of these offences on the grounds that they were "of extreme and uncertain width", were "largely subjective and could evolve into a means of suppressing unpopular or religious beliefs".
In addition, it was pointed out that the offences served little purpose as they had not been employed in recent years, if at all and there were in any case existing statutory provisions which adequately dealt with obscene public performances, displays and publications.
Turning to the offence of attempt, the Attorney General said the Bill provided for a definition of "attempt" as an act which was more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence.
It also provided that, where it is an offence to do something recklessly, it would also be an offence for a person to be reckless in attempting to do that thing, he said.
On the offence of incitement, Mr Mathews said the Bill provided for a statutory definition of the offence.
It also sought to retain the offence of incitement to conspire as recommended by the LRC because of its importance in the context of triad crime, which related to long term conspiracies such as those involving gambling, prostitution and drugs, he added.
Mr Mathews said in respect of each of the three offences, the Bill sought to remove the defence of impossibility, in line with the LRC's proposal on the basis that "it leads to the acquittal of individuals who would otherwise be considered a danger to society".
Debate of the Bill was adjourned.
End
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.