division_name: Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill &#8212; Entering or remaining in a designated area
motion: <p class="indent" pid="b654.2/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8216;Entering or remaining in designated areas overseas</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b656.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that the person had a reasonable excuse for entering, or remaining in, the designated area.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b663.0/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that the person had a reasonable excuse for entering, or remaining in, the designated area.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b663.0/9" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;those who travelled out of a sense of naivety, possibly with some brainwashing along the way, possibly in their mid-teens and who return in a state of utter disillusionment&#8230;we have to leave space for those individuals to be diverted away from the criminal courts.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b663.0/20" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;we have kept the Sentencing Council apprised of the provisions in the Bill, and the chairman has indicated that the council plans to revisit the guidelines once the Bill has completed its parliamentary passage.&#8221;&#8211;&#8211;[Official Report, Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Public Bill Committee, <phrase class="date" code="2018-07-03">3 July</phrase> 2018; c. 105.]</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b667.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;multi-dimensional, evolving rapidly and operating at a scale and pace we&#8217;ve not seen before.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b675.1/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;this offence would not be worthwhile for the UK.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b675.1/5" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;on the honest and worthy to show entry into the prohibited area for a legitimate purpose.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b675.1/7" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;will also cite aid purposes, so the ultimate burden of proof will still demand evidence not just of presence but also of training, logistical support, or involvement in fighting&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b675.1/9" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;area controlled by Islamic State (Daesh)&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b676.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;The cases in which a person has a reasonable excuse for the purposes of subsection (3) include (but are not limited to) those in which at the time of the person&#8217;s action or possession, the person did not know, and had no reason to believe&#8221;.</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b676.1/3" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;the Government and researchers have repeatedly asserted that there is no clear production line from viewing extremism or even being &#8216;radicalised&#8217; into becoming an active terrorist.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b676.1/6" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;a principled boundary line as to the legitimate usage of criminal law is being crossed.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b676.1/8" pwmotiontext="yes">&#8220;Given a choice&#8212;given a free hand&#8212;I would be more likely to argue that it is not necessary to legislate in this way at all.&#8221;&#8211;&#8211;[Official Report, Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Public Bill Committee, <phrase class="date" code="2018-06-26">26 June</phrase> 2018; c. 39, Q86.]</p>
  
  <p class="italic" pid="b682.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">The House divided:</p>
  
  <p pid="b682.0/3" pwmotiontext="yes">Ayes 292, Noes 47.</p>