Skip to main content Skip to accessibility
This website is not compatible with your web browser. You should install a newer browser. If you live in Jersey and need help upgrading call the States of Jersey web team on 440099.
Government of Jerseygov.je

Information and public services for the Island of Jersey

L'înformâtion et les sèrvices publyis pouor I'Île dé Jèrri

  • Choose the service you want to log in to:

  • gov.je

    Update your notification preferences

  • one.gov.je

    Access government services

  • CAESAR

    Clear goods through customs or claim relief

  • Talentlink

    View or update your States of Jersey job application

Terrorism (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Law 201-

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

  • demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision

  • providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 23 February 2015:

MINISTERIAL DECISION REFERENCE:    MD-C-2015-0026

DECISION SUMMARY TITLE:  Draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201-

DECISION SUMMARY AUTHOR:

Legislative and Policy Development, Financial Services

IS THE DECISION SUMMARY PUBLIC OR EXEMPT?  

Public

REPORT TITLE:  Written Report - Draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201-

REPORT AUTHOR OR NAME OF PERSON GIVING REPORT:  (if different from Decision  Summary Author)

Legislative and Policy Development, Financial Services

IS THE REPORT PUBLIC OR EXEMPT 

Public

DECISION AND REASON FOR THE DECISION:

The Deputy Chief Minister approved the draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201- (the “Draft Law”) for lodging and directed that the documents should be lodged au Greffe for debate by the States at the earliest opportunity.   

The draft Law make amendments to the Terrorism (Jersey) Law 2002 (the “T(J)L”) in furtherance to Jersey’s on-site evaluation by MONEYVAL regarding compliance with the FATF Recommendations on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. The amendments specifically deal with FATF Special Recommendation II (criminalisation the financing of terrorism and associated money laundering).

 

During the on-site visit, in addition to positive comments made by the assessors as to amendments recently made to T(J)L by virtue of the Proceeds of Crime and Terrorism (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 2014 comments were made as to the definition of “property” under T(J)L and the definition of “legal professional privilege”. The draft Law seeks to address those comments.

 

RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS:

There are no resource implications as a result of this decision.

 

ACTION REQUIRED:

That the Greffier of the States be requested to arrange for the draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201- to be lodged au Greffe for debate by the States at the earliest opportunity. 

SIGNATURE:

 

 

 

POSITION:

 

SENATOR ANDREW GREEN MBE

DEPUTY CHIEF MINISTER OF JERSEY

 

 

 

DATE SIGNED

EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE DECISION

Terrorism (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Law 201-

WRITTEN REPORT

 

Draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201- (the “Draft Law”)

 

Overview

 

The draft Law makes amendments to the Terrorism (Jersey) Law 2002 (the “T(J)L”) in furtherance to Jersey’s on-site evaluation by MONEYVAL regarding compliance with the FATF Recommendations on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. The amendments specifically deal with FATF Special Recommendation II (criminalisation the financing of terrorism and associated money laundering).

 

During the on-site visit, in addition to positive comments made by the assessors as to amendments recently made to T(J)L by virtue of the Proceeds of Crime and Terrorism (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Jersey) Law 2014 comments were made as to the definition of “property” under T(J)L and the definition of “legal professional privilege”. The draft Law seeks to address those comments.

 

It should be noted that equivalent amendments are being made by virtue of another Proposition to the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999 to deal with these issues in the circumstances of money laundering.

 

Definition of “Property”

 

The definition of “property” is relevant to confiscation of property under the T(J)L. The evaluators commented that whilst the definition of “property” in the T(J)L was broad, in their opinion, the international standards in this regard were not comprehensively transposed into domestic legislation. The evaluators considered that the language of the conventions (and the FATF definitions) clearly covering legal documents or instruments evidencing title to or interest in such assets should be adopted to avoid legal uncertainty. They further commented that the UK Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 contained extended definitions of property which could also be relevant in the context of money laundering in Jersey. The evaluators urged the insular authorities to reconsider the relevance of these terms in the local context.

 

The Chief Minister’s Department along with the Law Officers’ department and with specific consultation with the Solicitor General have considered both s.340 of the UK Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, the FATF definitions and the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (“the Warsaw Convention”) and are of the view that the revised definition contained in draft Law should therefore meet the evaluators concerns.

 

Definition of Legal Professional Privilege

 

The evaluators commented that they considered that the definition of legal professional privilege in T(J)L is wider than the customary law definition. They went on to recommend that the definition in the T(J)L should be removed.  The Chief Minister’s Department along with the Law Officers’ department and with specific consultation with the Solicitor General have considered the matter and have concluded that is therefore advisable to remove the definition of legal professional privilege in T(J)L. The provisions in the draft Law should therefore meet the evaluators concerns.

 

By removing references in the T(J)L to information coming to a professional legal adviser in “privileged circumstances” and instead referring to “items subject to legal privilege” any references to legal privilege in that Law shall have the meaning as acquired by the customary law of Jersey. In Bene Ltd v VAR Hanson & Partners [1997] JLR N10a, the Royal Court comprehensively described direct communications between a lawyer and his client (or via third party agents) to be subject to legal privilege if they are confidential and for the dominant purpose of seeking or giving legal advice on the client’s legal position or rights (“legal advice privilege”). Also privileged are confidential communications between a lawyer and his client, non-professional agent or third party, made after litigation has been commenced or contemplated and for the sole or dominant purpose of advising in relation to, or seeking evidence or information for, such litigation (“litigation privilege”).

 

Financial and Manpower Implications

 

There are no financial or manpower implications as a result of the States adopting the draft Regulations.

 

Human Rights implications

 

The Deputy Chief Minister has been provided with separate advice from the Law Officers’ Department and has been advised that it is appropriate for a statement to be made in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Human Rights (Jersey) Law 2000 confirming that the Deputy Chief Minister is of the view that the provisions of the draft Terrorism (Amendment No.4) (Jersey) Law 201- are compatible with the Convention Rights.

 

Recommendation

 

It is recommended that the Deputy Chief Minister request that the Greffier of the States arrange for the draft Law to be lodged and that they are debated by the States at the earliest opportunity.

 

 

LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY DEVELOPMENT

FINANCIAL SERVICES

CHIEF MINISTER’S DEPARTMENT

 

23 FEBRUARY 2015

 

 

 

Back to top
rating button