There is neither a sentencing guideline for terrorist offences nor any Court of Appeal guideline case in relation to offences of encouraging support for a proscribed organisation under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The court should approach sentencing a section 12 offence by reference to a consideration of seriousness, having regard to culpability and harm, as is required by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. In considering culpability, a court should consider the position of the offender and whether they are in a position of authority or influence. The persistence of efforts to gain support will be relevant, as will the type of activity involved. In the context of offending committed by addressing a live meeting, it is necessary to consider the size and nature of the audience targeted (para 34).

In relation to harm, a court should consider the extent of support gained or likely to be gained for the proscribed organisation. Whether the offences involve direct encouragement of any specific act of violence is relevant. Any direct link established between the speeches made and any terrorist or violent act by any member of the audience, places the offence very high on the scale of seriousness. If such direct consequences are not shown to have occurred, it does not mean the matter is not serious in the context of an offence under section 12. The offence is committed if there is an invitation for support for a proscribed organisation and the purpose of the speaker is to encourage support or furtherance of the organisation’s terrorist activities in the future. Such conduct is inimical to the interests of the state (para 35– 36).

It is also important to consider the nature of the audience addressed. Inviting a live audience comprising those involved in terrorism, young adults or children to a planned meeting, on a religious anniversary, or at an important time of the religious year, would be fertile ground for the receipt of addresses made to them. Where the aim of the addresses includes the deepening of radical views already held by providing support or in furtherance of the organisation’s activities, it makes no difference whether the audience is already radicalised. Indeed, those who are already radicalised may be readier to act in support of the aims of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (para 37).

Use of the internet differs in form, targeting and intensity, all of which require analysis in an appropriate case (para 40).

The nature of the offending is such that a sentencing court will have in mind the need to punish, deter and incapacitate or disrupt criminal activity of this sort, in passing a sentence proportionate to the circumstances of the offence and offender. Rehabilitation is only likely to carry significant weight at the lowest levels of offending under section 12, such as in the case of an offender of good character, not of a mature age, who is naïve, coerced or impressionable (para 42).