R v Gul [2012] EWCA Crim 280, [2012] All ER (D) 141 (Feb)
The definition in s 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (TA 2000) was clear. Those who attacked the military forces of a government or the coalition forces in Afghanistan or Iraq, with the requisite intention set out in TA 2000, were terrorists. In domestic law, it was established principle that there was no exemption from criminal liability for terrorist activities which were motivated or said to be morally justified by the alleged nobility of the terrorist cause. R v F [2007] 2 All ER 193 emphasised the broad definition of terrorism in TA 2000. There was nothing in international law which either compelled or persuaded the court to read down the clear terms of TA 2000 or to exempt such persons from the definition in the Act.
