A/HRC/16/51 2. The action is done or attempted with the intention of: (a) Provoking a state of terror in the general public or a segment of it; or (b) Compelling a Government or international organization to do or abstain from doing something; and (3) The action corresponds to: (a) The definition of a serious offence in national law, enacted for the purpose of complying with international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism or with resolutions of the Security Council relating to terrorism; or (b) G. All elements of a serious crime defined by national law. Offense of incitement to terrorism 29. The Security Council called for the prohibition of incitement to terrorism in its resolution 1624 (2005) paragraph 1 (a). Some States have taken the view that this does not require the establishment of a separate offence of incitement to terrorism, because incitement is in some countries a party offence and, as such, the incitement to any offence, including terrorism offences, already amounts to an offence. There can be practical difficulties with this approach;50 the Special Rapporteur notes that article 5 of the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism requires States parties to criminalize the public provocation to commit acts of terrorism as a specific offence. This is consistent with a proactive approach to the countering of terrorist acts and the prevention of radicalization.51 It also allows States to ensure that terrorist offences are punishable by custodial sentences heavier than those imposable under national law for similar offences committed without a terrorist intent (that is, offences not undertaken for the purpose of provoking a state of terror or of compelling a Government or international organization to do or abstain from doing something).52 30. The Special Rapporteur has previously commended as a best practice the definition of incitement to terrorism in article 5 of the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism.53 This definition forms the basis of the model offence in practice 8 below; however, in reaction to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Leroy v France, and noting that article 12(1) of the Convention requires that the implementation of article 5 respect human rights obligations, particularly the right to freedom of expression, the Special Rapporteur has introduced a slight modification to that definition to refer to conduct that causes an objective danger of a terrorist offence being committed whether or not “expressly” advocating a terrorist offence (rather than the Convention reference to “directly” advocating such an offence).54 This may cover the situation of using coded 50 51 52 53 54 - See A/HRC/4/26/Add.3, para. 26, and Conte, op. cit., pp. 450-460. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Guide for the Legislative Incorporation and Implementation of the Universal Instruments against Terrorism, 2006, para. 250. See Security Council resolution 1373 (2001), para. 2(e); United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Guide, ibid. , para. 245; European Union Council Framework Decision on Combating Terrorism (2002/475/JHA), art. 5(2); questionnaire response submitted by Finland; and Georgia, Criminal Code, arts. 12 and 323. A/HRC/4/26/Add.3, paras. 26-27. Leroy v France, application 36109/03, 2 October 2008. 15