U. S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) Report 7 January - 6 February 2019 and HORN OF AFRICA/GULF OF GUINEA/ SOUTHEAST ASIA: Piracy Analysis and Warning Weekly (PAWW) Report for 31 January - 6 February 2019

U. S. Navy Office of Naval ... by on Scribd

U. S. Navy Office of Naval ... by on Scribd

Gulf of Guinea Pirates: Armed Guard Killed Off Nigeria in Gunfight with Pirates

Report of an armed security guard being killed in gunfight with pirates here :

According to reports from the IMB, last week saw an armed security guard killed offshore Nigeria. At 2310 UTC on the 13 Dec, heavily armed pirates in a speed boat chased and fired upon an offshore support vessel in position 04:16.5N 005:19.8E.

IMB report here:

Location detail: Around 25nm SW Offshore, Bayelsa
Type of Attack :Fired Upon
Narrations: 13.12.2012: 2310 UTC: Posn: 04:16.0N - 005:19.8E, Around 25nm SW Offshore, Bayelsa, Nigeria.
Pirates armed with machine guns in a boat chased and fired upon an offshore support vessel underway. Master raised alarm, increased speed, sent distress message and all crew except the Master mustered in the safe room. The on board security team returned fire and after around 20 minutes the firing ceased and the pirates moved away. Due to the exchange of fire one security personal was killed and two sustained injuries.

UPDATE: Just in case you wondering, the IMB shows the following piracy events so far in 2012:

IMO | Maritime Safety Committee re "Arms Aboard Ships"

IMO | Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 90th session, 16 to 25 May 2012 (High-level segment on arms on board):

Opening address by IMO Secretary-General Koji Sekimizu
May 16, 2012
MSC 90
Secretary-General Koji Sekimizu's opening address to the High-level segment on arms on board
16 May 2012

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Excellencies, distinguished delegates,

As I mentioned in my opening remarks to the meeting, this is the first ever high-level segment of the Committee and its importance is underscored by the presence here today of the President of the Assembly and the Council Chairman. I am particularly pleased to welcome and receive the support of the host Government through the participation of the Secretary of State for Transport – the Right Honourable Justine Greening MP – and of many Ambassadors, High Commissioners, Vice Minsters and others who have indicated their wish to participate in this very important debate – I wish to express my sincere appreciation to you all.

Reports received by the Organization indicate that, although the number of attacks by pirates continues to increase, the proportion of attacks that are successful has decreased. This may be due to a number of factors, including naval protection and better implementation of IMO guidance and Best Management Practices, including the use of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel (PCASP). There is anecdotal evidence that the number of ships carrying firearms has increased. On the basis of declarations of weapons carried and on their observations, naval forces estimate that around 25% of ships in the High Risk Area are carrying firearms, however it is also believed that a number of ships are not declaring the presence of private armed security for various reasons, including the lack of flag State approval.

The carriage of firearms on board merchant ships is a complex legal issue with Member States taking diverse positions. The Committee has determined that the carriage of armed personnel is a matter for flag States to authorize, however it has also accepted that their carriage has legal implications for coastal and port States, particularly with respect to the carriage, embarkation and disembarkation of firearms and security equipment in areas under the jurisdiction of such port or coastal States.

Resolution A.1044(27) on piracy and armed robbery against ships in waters off the coast of Somalia endorses the position of this Committee that seafarers should not carry firearms and that the carriage of armed personnel on board ships for enhancing their protection should be left to flag States to decide, once a thorough risk assessment exercise has been carried out and following consultations with the shipowners concerned.

Amongst other things, the resolution strongly urges Governments which have not already done so:

.1 to decide as a matter of national policy, whether ships entitled to fly their flag should be authorized to carry privately contracted armed security personnel and, if so, under what conditions; and

.2 in their capacity as port or coastal States, to decide on their policy on the embarkation, disembarkation and carriage of privately contracted armed security personnel and of the firearms, ammunition and security-related equipment, and to promulgate it widely to other Member Governments, to industry, and to the Organization.

As a truly global industry with many stakeholders, shipping benefits from harmonization of procedures, adoption of common minimum standards and clarity with respect to national legal regimes. However, while progress has been made on developing general guidance, policy on the use of Private Security Guards is not common among Member Governments and, across the shipping industry. There are no agreed minimum performance standards for Private Security Guards and ships using them are subject to many, diverse legal regimes at present.

In order to stimulate debate on this important subject, we have issued MSC 90/20/5, which describes the current situation and outlines a number of related policy issues requiring further deliberation by this Committee. While recognizing the reality of the situation in which Private Security Guards are employed and the diverse positions of Governments, there is a need to consider how the international community should deal with the issue of Private Security Guards and, in particular, the need to arrive at practical solutions to the issue.

Since the issue of Private Security Guards on board ships is of utmost sensitivity and requires detailed consideration of the policy issues involved, I considered it particularly helpful and appropriate, under this agenda item, for the Committee to engage in a high-level policy debate on this topic.

I invite all Member Governments representing flag, port and coastal States and States of seafarers, and shipowners to share their views on this issue of arms on board which is now critical for the international maritime community.

The outcome of your discussions today will provide the clear policy direction required for subsequent discussions on related, technical documents that the Committee and its Maritime Security and Piracy Working Group will be considering under this agenda item.

***

We have been dealing with piracy problems off the coast of Somalia for 5 years now.

Despite serious efforts by Governments, navies and the industry, the international community has not been able to stop Somali piracy.

We have seen significant developments over the last 4 years:

Somali Pirates: "Private" Counter-Pirate Navy?

The East African reports: "Privately armed ‘navies’ to protect ships off Somalia coast":

Privately armed patrol boats aimed at deterring Somali pirates could be up and running by as early as next month, after a prominent insurance firm agreed to provide financial support.

Following the successful introduction of armed guards aboard several merchant ships plying the waters of the Gulf of Eden and the East African coast, Martin Reith, the founder and former chief executive of the Lloyd’s of London insurer Ascot Underwriting, has taken the protection business one stage further with his plans for a Convoy Escort Programme, which will complement the overstretched naval forces in the region.

***

The investors are hoping that once the funding is in place, they will buy around seven secondhand naval patrol vessels; the money will also help to finance the armed security guards that will be on board.

Not a new idea and even the first effort of implementing the idea (remember Blackwater's anti-pirate escort? - well, there are several agencies offering private escort vessels already).

What law will rule the surrender of pirates to private companies?

There are a lot of questions floating about -exactly where these forces will operate? Under what laws? To whom will their "force" be accountable? Some of these issues are touched on in the book Maritime Private Security: Market responses to piracy, terrorism and waterborne security risks in the 21st century", edited by Patrick Cullen and Claude Berube and in a whole bunch of posts on this blog.

More from the article:

“This is not a navy,” he said. “What we’re trying to be is a deterrent force. Prevention is within our reach.”

The backers of the idea have stressed that it complies with maritime law. They say it will observe the International Maritime Organisation conventions, such as the Safety of Life at Sea treaty.

The Royal Navy fades away

The more the merrier and it is timely, I suppose, now that the Royal Navy has announced it is now too small to be able to play in the Somali anti-piracy business on a full time basis - see Cuts force Royal Navy to drop Somalia piracy patrol:

The UK has had to scale back its commitment to counter-piracy because the Royal Navy no longer has enough warships to dedicate one to Somalia all year round.

While the US, France, Italy, Denmark and other nations still send frigates to thwart criminals who cause havoc with international trade, the Guardian has learned that Britain has quietly withdrawn its ships from these patrols, even though David Cameron has made Somalia's piracy problem a foreign policy priority.

Maybe the Brits can still afford to rent a maritime patrol aircraft to send, like Luxembourg and lend "top cover" to the private forces in the Gulf of Aden.

Armed Guards on Merchant Ships: The "Flag-State Endorsement"

Who will be responsible for Barney?

Interesting update to the Italian armed guard mess off India at The Hindu "Business Line" Ships with armed guards: Govt may fix responsibility on flag-state:

India's maritime administration may make ‘flag-state endorsement' mandatory for foreign merchant ships entering Indian waters with armed security guards on board. The idea is to make the Government of the country in which the ship is registered (flag-state) also responsible for any action on the part of the armed guards deployed on the vessel.
***
Currently, flag-states give a general approval for shipping companies to engage private security guards. The contract is between the ship owners and the security agency which provides the armed men. With rising incidents of attacks on cargo ships by Somali pirates, many countries, including India and Italy, have allowed their merchant ships to have armed guards on board. Ships have to follow the policy (on deployment of guards) of the country in which they are registered. The policy is based on the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) guidelines.

Problems can arise when the ship is owned, managed and operated by people of different nationalities. Typically, a ship may be registered in one country and its owner based in another. Further, the private security agency that provides the guards could be operating from a third country. Adding to this, there is every possibility of the security men belonging to different nationalities. Given such complexities, Government officials here said it needs to be made mandatory that flag states should shoulder the responsibility of ensuring that any liability arising out of reckless acts by armed men on board are honoured.

Of course, there are problems with such an "endorsement," too. What if the foreign merchant ship is not in "Indian waters?" In fact, what if the entire act complained of occurs on the "high seas?" How do you hold the government of some "flag of convenience" state like Tuvalu responsible? Somewhere I once dug up the info that about 35% of shipping sails under a "flag of convenience." Is India going to forbid entry to its waters for such ships - not that it may matter all that much because many of those ships can't afford or won't hire armed security guards.
UPDATE 22 Feb 12: "It was an accident, not manslaughter" - an opinion piece.