Criminal Law

Student number: 47964235

Assignment 01

Unique number: 592916

Answer:

In my argument set out below, I shall prove whether or not X will be liable for the crime of terrorism.

I will take into account the definition of terrorist activities set out in The Protection of Constitutional

Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act 33 of 2004, aswell as discuss the elements of

the offence of terrorism, to come to a conclusion.

The above Act states that any act committed in or outside the Republic which “involves the release

into the environment of, or distributing or exposing the public to any dangerous or harmful

substance…, endangers the life, or violates the physical integrity of any person…, causes serious risk

to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public” are prohibited. By poisoning the

food parcels distributed by the Z party to the public, X can be said to have violated Section 1 of the

Act, set out above. The fact that the public became ill can safely say this.

Furthermore, X’s conduct fulfilled the elements of terrorism. The party performed the unlawful act

with the intention to “cause the public to abstain or refrain from doing any act” which is the first

component of intention.

The State will have to prove the second component of the intention requirement, namely that the

act was performed “…for the purpose of the advancement of an individual or collective political,

religious, ideological or philosophical motive, objective, cause or undertaking”. One can argue that X

had a collective political motive, namely to encourage people to vote for them.

As set out above, it is evident that direct intention was present at the time of the act of terrorism. X

has fulfilled the definition aswell as element of terrorism therefore X will be liable for the crime of

terrorism.

Word count: 299 words