Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-.

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (25/05/2008) regarding: Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-.

Decision Reference: MD-HA-2008-0029
Decision Summary Title :	Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-		Date of Decision Summary:	Tuesday, 20 May 2008
Decision Summary Author:	Heidi Sydor, Executive Officer		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:
Written Report Title :	Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-		Date of Written Report:	Monday, 19 May 2008
Written Report Author:	Caroline Dutot Legal Assistant		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-
Decision(s): The Minister approved the draft Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200- and accompanying report, and asked that it be lodged ‘au Greffe’ for debate on the 15th July.
Reason(s) for Decision: These Regulations replace the Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 2003, which listed countries and territories whose orders for the forfeiture of terrorist property or restraining dealing with such property could be enforced in Jersey and made provision for such enforcement. The new Regulations allow for the enforcement of such orders made in any country or territory outside Jersey. This change will bring Jersey in line with the international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, recommendation 38, requiring appropriate laws and procedures to provide effective and timely response to mutual legal assistance.
Resource Implications: There are no financial or manpower implications arising from these Regulations
Action required: The Executive Officer, Home Affairs, to request the Greffier of the States to lodge ‘for debate on 15th July.
Signature:		Position: Minister for Home Affairs
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-.

19th May, 2008

Report

Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-

In October and November of this year the Island’s framework to counter money laundering and terrorist financing is to be the subject of a review by the International Monetary Fund. Jersey will be assessed against the international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (“FATF”). In order to implement a number of criteria set out in the 40 Recommendations and 9 Special Recommendations of the FATF, against which Jersey will be assessed, a number of amendments were proposed and passed by the States of Jersey last year in respect of the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law, 1999, (“POCL”) the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law, 1988 (“DTOL”), the Terrorism (Jersey) Law, 2002 (“TL”) and the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) (Jersey) Law, 2001 (“CJICL”). These amendments are now in force.

One of the amendments passed in respect of each of the laws referred to above sought to implement Recommendation 38, which requires countries to have appropriate laws and procedures in place to provide an effective and timely response to mutual legal assistance. Mutual legal assistance is the formal way in which countries request and provide assistance in obtaining evidence located in one country to assist in criminal investigations or proceedings in another country.

Prior to the amendment of the POCL, DTOL, TL and CJICL the provision of assistance to another jurisdiction to enable the enforcement of an external confiscation order under the POCL and DTOL, or an external restraint or forfeiture order under the TL, or the enforcement of an overseas forfeiture order under the CJICL was dependant on that jurisdiction being listed as a designated country or territory to whom assistance could be given. There was concern that Jersey would be criticised for not providing “effective” mutual legal assistance because the list of designated countries had not been kept up to date in recent years. Instead of updating the list of countries and territories (contained in Regulations issued under the various Laws), the better solution was considered to be that the list of countries and territories should be abandoned and that assistance should be offered on a case by case basis. This was the approach adopted in the amendments to the various Laws, which are now in force.

Prior to amendment, the TL provided that the provision of assistance to another jurisdiction to enable the enforcement of an external restraint or forfeiture order was conditional on that jurisdiction being listed in the Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations, 2003, as a designated country or territory to whom assistance can be given. As a result of amendments to the primary legislation the enforcement in Jersey of external restraint and forfeiture orders is no longer conditional on countries or territories being designated. The amendments enable external forfeiture or restraint orders from any jurisdiction to be capable of registration by the Royal Court.

Whilst the enforcement in Jersey of overseas forfeiture orders under the CJICL is no longer conditional on countries or territories being designated, the designated countries and territories remain listed in the Regulations made under the CJICL. Instead of amending the existing Regulations, it has been decided, in the interests of clarity, that the current Regulations should be repealed and replaced.

These draft Regulations would replace the current Terrorism (Enforcement of External Orders) (Jersey) Regulations, 2003 with provisions which are substantially the same as those contained in the current Regulations except that (i) the references to designated countries and territories are removed; and (ii) references to any provisions which have been repealed or amended as a result of the changes to the primary legislation have been altered.

Financial/Manpower Implications -

These Regulations have no financial or manpower resource implications for the States.