text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill - Clause 1 - Authorisation of Criminal Conduct - Exclusions
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  @ MP voted aye against restricting the scope of authorisations for criminal conduct by undercover officers and covert sources to exclude activities including causing death or bodily harm, violating the sexual integrity of an individual, obstructing justice, wrongful detention and torture.
  
  @ MP voted no to restrict the scope of authorisations for criminal conduct by undercover officers and covert sources to exclude activities including causing death or bodily harm, violating the sexual integrity of an individual, obstructing justice, wrongful detention and torture.
  
  The majority of MPs voted against restricting the scope of authorisations for criminal conduct by undercover officers and covert sources to exclude activities including causing death or bodily harm, violating the sexual integrity of an individual, obstructing justice, wrongful detention and torture.
  
  Â 
  MPs were considering the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill.[1][2]
  
  The motion supported by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
  
  :That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 2.
  
  Lords amendment 2[3] stated:
  
  :Page 3, line 2, at end insertâ
  :â(8A) A criminal conduct authorisation may not authorise any criminal conductâ
  :(a) intentionally causing death or grievous bodily harm to an individual or being reckless as to whether such harm is caused;
  :(b) involving an attempt in any manner to obstruct or pervert the course of justice;
  :(c) amounting to an offence under the [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents Sexual Offences Act 2003], the [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/contents Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009] or any offence listed in [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/schedule/3 Schedule 3 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003];
  :(d) subjecting an individual to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, within the meaning of [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/2 Article 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998]; or
  :(e) depriving a person of their liberty, within the meaning of [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/4 Article 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998].â
  
  The rejected amendment would have impacted Clause 1 of the Bill[4] which provided for a new section of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 titled ''Covert human intelligence sources: criminal conduct authorisations''. The section provided for authorisation for criminal conduct in the course of, or otherwise in connection with, the conduct of a covert human intelligence source. Â The rejected amendment sought to prevent undercover officers and covert sources being permitted to cause death, commit grievous bodily harm, torture, wrongfully arrest, rape or sexually assault.
  --
  
  * [1] [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2783 Parliament's webpage on the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill], Parliament.uk
  * [2] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0243/en/0243EN.pdf Explanatory notes to the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, 21 January 2020], Parliament.uk
  * [3] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0243/0243.pdf Lords amendments to the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, 21 January 2020], Parliament.uk
  * [4] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-01/144/5801144.pdf Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, as introduced in the House of Lords], Parliament.uk
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  