UK Supreme Court Rules on the Definition of Terrorism in Regina v Mohammed Gul

On October 23, 2013, in its judgment in the Regina v Mohammed Gul case, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom tackled two important issues: the definition of terrorism in times of armed conflict and the relationship between domestic legislation and international rules criminalizing certain behaviors.[2] The Court heard an appeal against the decision of the United Kingdom Court of Appeal in Regina v Mohammed Gul.[3] Gul was prosecuted for supporting terrorism as defined under the UK Terrorism Act, found guilty, and sentenced to five years in prison.[4]