R v Nabeela Anjum

For offences under the Terrorism Act 2000, culpability depends on the significance of withheld information, while harm depends on the nature of the terrorist activity to which it relates. Where that activity falls within the guideline’s most serious harm category, that category supplies the starting point even if the activity is prevented or proves less serious than intended. The sentence may then be reduced to reflect the reduced likelihood or non-occurrence and the offender’s mitigation. A court may find a sentence unduly lenient yet decline to increase it where fairness and exceptional personal circumstances justify that exercise of discretion.

Mrs Anjum was convicted at the Crown Court at Leeds of two offences under the Terrorism Act 2000 for failing to disclose information about Hassan’s planned terrorist activity. The judge imposed concurrent special custodial sentences of three years under the Sentencing Code. The Solicitor General sought leave under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer the sentence as unduly lenient. Mrs Anjum separately sought leave to appeal against sentence. The central issue was whether the guideline’s harm category depended on the actual activity proved or on the terrorist activity to which the withheld information related, together with issues of mitigation, totality, disparity and the court’s discretion.

Disposition. The court granted the Solicitor General leave to refer, found the sentences unduly lenient because of an error in guideline categorisation, but exercised its discretion not to increase them. Mrs Anjum’s application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused.

1. Statutory and guideline framework. The essence of an offence under section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 is withholding information which the offender knows or believes may materially assist in preventing terrorism or securing prosecution or conviction. Culpability depends on the significance of the information, including its value in identifying the terrorist and the actual or intended terrorist activity. Harm depends on the nature of that terrorist activity.
2. Harm category. If the related terrorist activity falls within category 1 of the guideline, category 1 supplies the starting point. That remains so where the activity is prevented or proves less serious than intended. The court may make a downward adjustment for those matters, but they do not alter the appropriate starting category.
3. Statutory consistency. This approach accords with section 63 of the Sentencing Code, which requires consideration of harm caused, intended or foreseeably caused. It also accords with section 38B(1), which covers information about terrorist acts that never occur and preparation or instigation that may never result in an act.
4. Application. The offences fell within category 1A, rather than category 2A. The starting point was therefore seven years, with a range of six to nine years. The court considered that the sentence should have been reduced to the bottom of that range because Hassan was unlikely to carry out his plan and did not do so, followed by a substantial reduction for Mrs Anjum’s unusually strong personal mitigation. No upward adjustment was required for the two counts because the judge’s approach to totality was correct.
5. Discretion and appeal. Although the appropriate total custodial term was not less than four years, the court had discretion not to increase the sentence. It took account of the apparent unfairness of increasing Mrs Anjum’s sentence when another apparently similar offender had not been referred, and of her serious health problems in custody. Disparity with a sentence imposed in different proceedings could not assist her appeal.

The sentences therefore remained unchanged.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), [2024] EWCA Crim 1373: granted leave to refer, found the sentences unduly lenient, declined to increase them, and refused Mrs Anjum leave to appeal.
• Crown Court at Leeds: convicted Mrs Anjum of two offences under section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 and imposed concurrent special custodial sentences of three years.