Men who have fled servitude on fishing boats recount beatings and worse as nets are cast for the catch that will become pet food and livestock feed.This series was previously mentioned here.
Few places on Earth are as free from legal oversight as the high seas. One ship has been among the most persistent offenders.and 2. Murder at Sea: Captured on Video, but Killers Go Free:
A video shows at least four unarmed men being gunned down in the water. Despite dozens of witnesses, the killings went unreported and remain a mysteryShips belong to and are legally controlled by their flag states. This may mean there is no control at all as a practical matter. Often, in the absence of a civilizing force, Hobbes was right with this:
Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of Warre, where every man is Enemy to every man; the same is consequent to the time, wherein men live without other security, than what their own strength, and their own invention shall furnish them withall. In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.I guess in theory there could be some sort of policing done at sea, but like many theoretical things, the realities are that people are being killed, enslaved and otherwise maltreated at sea and the sovereign rights of nations rule.
(Hobbes, LEVIATHAN, Chap 13)
Following further debate during a working group, the MSC agreed Interim Guidance to private maritime security companies (PMSC) providing contracted armed security personnel on board ships in the High Risk Area.
The guidance covers:
• PMSC Professional Certification, including the recommendation that PMSC should seek certification with relevant national and international private maritime security service standards when these are established;
• PMSC Company requirements, including the recommendation that PMSC should establish procedures to provide maritime security services to ship owners and ship operators and comply with all relevant legal requirements;
• Management, including recommendations on selection, vetting and training of personnel for a PCASP team;
• Deployment considerations, addressing the specific aspects of PCASP deployment and the role of the PMSC in ensuring efficient and successful deployments, including communications with the ship owner or operator, and including recommendations relating to management of firearms and ammunition from embarkation to disembarkation and use of force. (The PMSC should recognize that laws governing the use of force may differ over time and according to location. The applicable national law, including any criminal laws, for an incident on a ship from which PCASP will be operating will be principally that of the flag State. It may also include the laws and regulations of coastal, port and other States.)
The court's ruling gives prosecutors wider latitude to go after people who attack U.S. vessels, U.S. Attorney Neil MacBride said. "For decades, the international community has considered violent attacks on the high seas as an act of piracy, and today's ruling will strengthen our ability to hold those who attack U.S. vessels by force accountable, regardless of whether they are successful or not," said MacBride, whose office handled both cases.You can take look at the decision by going here.
In one case, a lower court judge dismissed charges against five Somalis in an attack on the USS Ashland, ruling since the men had not taken control or robbed the ship their actions did not rise to the definition of piracy. The ruling sends that case back to U.S. District Court for trial, the government said.
In the other case, prosecutors convicted five Somali men who attacked the USS Nicholas. It was the first piracy conviction in a U.S. courtroom since 1819. The ruling by the three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld those convictions and the life sentences the men received.
 |
| Barney Fife - Shipboard Security Expert? |
He concludes by recognising the possible need for armed guards, but stresses that owners and masters to ensure that they are legally protected. A very difficult balancing act.It's all about control and accountability. You know - having someone to arrest or sue.
Why the vessels were operating, apparently unescorted, so near pirate-infested waters is not clear.Now, thanks to the Voice of America in an article by Steve Herman, Hijacked Indian Vessels Put Focus on Illicit Maritime Trade, there may be an explanation - old-fashioned smuggling:
The map shows normal dhow ports around the Indian Ocean. The red arrow points to the port of Kismayo (Chisimayu on the map).The vessels, all under 400 tons each, are based out of several ports in India's Gujarat State. Reports say the missing ships had been visiting the rebel-held port of Kismayo in Somalia.***
[Indian] Navy spokesman Commander P.V.S. Satish tells VOA ship operators are reluctant to inform authorities their crews have been hijacked.
"I think it would probably be for fear of the fact that they would be prevented from going to these area and that would affect their livelihood. Sometimes it has happened in the past that we come to know much later that such an incident has actually happened," said Satish.
The dhows are part of a centuries-old tradition of Gujaratis trading between the African east coast and the Arabian Peninsula.
A Germany-based environmental group, Ecoterra, accuses the Indians of exporting charcoal and other contraband from the port to Dubai. It says the Indian fleet also may be involved in other criminal activity, such as human trafficking and delivering drugs and weapons.
Taking charcoal from Somalia to meet demand in the Gulf States is a lucrative, but illegal, trade blamed for deforestation in Somalia.
GULF OF ADEN (Aug. 30, 2009) Members of the visit, board, search, and seizure team of the guided-missile cruiser USS Anzio (CG 68) approach a dhow to question the crew. Anzio is the flagship for Combined Task Force 151, a multinational task force established to conduct counter-piracy operations. (U.S. Navy photo by Information System Technician 2nd Class Marshall Watson/Released)
The Japan Coast Guard on Friday arrested a member of U.S.-based antiwhaling group Sea Shepherd Conservation Society for trespassing in connection with his boarding of a whaling fleet vessel in the Antarctic Ocean last month.More fun will be had if Mr. Watson tries to enter Japan to testify on Mr. Bethune's behalf.
***
The Japan Coast Guard obtained an arrest warrant for Bethune on Thursday.
It is the first time the JCG has been involved in a case of ship trespassing in international waters, according to the agency.
Tatsuro Shinjo, deputy director general of the Third Regional Coast Guard Headquarters, said the coast guard decided to handle the arrest because Bethune does not reside in Japan and coast guard officials are to carry out the investigation.
Shinjo said that the captain of the Shonan Maru No. 2 did not make a citizens arrest of Bethune but held him under "protective custody." Earlier reports said Bethune ostensibly boarded the whaler to "arrest" its skipper after the ship hit his high-tech vessel the Ady Gil in the port bow, chopping it in two, in January. The boat sank shortly afterward.
***
Paul Watson, the head of Sea Shepherd, told Kyodo News he thought it was "very strange . . . the aggrieved captain is the one who is going to be arrested."
"Pete Bethune was prepared for this, and he said let's go back to Japan, let's throw everything out on the table and clear this up," he said, speaking from Hobart, Tasmania, where the group's boats are currently docked.
A Military Sealift Command ship, USNS Lewis and Clark has been adapted for pirate fighting, according to this:A civilian cargo ship drafted by the U.S. Navy to fight high-seas piracy has been equipped as the first U.S. vessel that can temporarily hold captured suspects, officials said.I assume that representatives from People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates or some such group will be up in arms about a diet of rice and beans.
The USNS Lewis and Clark, usually used to haul cargo and ammunition, has been reconfigured to hold as many as 26 suspected pirates — signaling a paradigm shift in the Navy’s counterpiracy missions, which previously did not allow for the capture of such suspects.
An agreement between the U.S. State Department and the Kenyan government signed in mid-January supplied "the missing link" that now lets U.S. military and coalition nations capture suspected pirates and then turn them over to Kenya for prosecution, said Lt. Nathan Christensen, a spokesman with U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/5th Fleet.
The Lewis and Clark joined Combined Task Force 151 as "a staging platform," from which the Navy can launch either of the SH-60 Navy helicopters now assigned to the ship, or serve as a temporary holding center for suspected pirates.
Currently, no one is being held onboard.
The ship’s crew, reduced from 158 to 118 civilian and military mariners to accommodate its new mission, reconfigured part of the ship as a holding area. Crews set down matting and blankets, and the ship’s steward set aside foods like rice and beans, the ship’s master, civilian mariner Capt. William McCarthy, said Monday in a phone interview.
"Although this mission is unique, it’s not unique to support a military operation," McCarthy said. "Military Sealift Command operates ships around the world, and we’re quite frequently asked to support military missions."
Kenya and the United States have signed a memorandum of understanding that will allow pirates captured off Kenya's coast to be tried in Kenyan courts. The international community has been searching for ways to prosecute pirates since the rate of attacks in the region spiked, last year.
***
Britain has already reached a similar agreement to hand over pirates to Kenyan authorities. Eight pirates detained last year are facing charges in the Kenyan port city, Mombasa.
One of several international legal stumbling blocks in thwarting Somali pirates has been a lack of an agreed place to hold trials and to imprison captured pirates. Now, it may be that an agreement to end that impasse is near, according to this:Captured Somali pirates could soon face trials and serve jail sentences outside their homeland under a pact being negotiated between American officials and regional allies, the head of a new U.S. anti-piracy task force said Friday.It is a step in the right direction.
The lack of an international framework to bring pirates to justice is among the many frustrations for naval forces struggling to curb rising attacks on merchant vessels off lawless Somalia, where pirates launched more than 100 assaults on ships last year and took away millions of dollars in ransom.
Rear Adm. Terence McKnight told The Associated Press an accord could be reached within weeks to clear the way for piracy trials and imprisonment in countries "in the region." He declined, however, to name the nations possibly willing to hold the trials.
"We're working with a couple of countries that have helped ... out before," McKnight said in a telephone interview from the USS San Antonio, which began anti-piracy patrols last week along with another U.S. warship.
A spate of articles on the pirates of Somalia offered up over the weekend including a summary piece titled Pirates of Aden: This year, Somalian pirates hogged the news with their derring-do in the Gulf of Aden but shipowners were not amused as they reportedly had to pay millions to secure the release of their vessels and crew.One titled "The year Somali pirates challenged the world:
The Gulf of Aden, located between Somalia and Yemen, was the focal point of pirate activities.
Taking advantage of a country without a stable government, the pirates attacked more than 90 vessels this year, seizing almost 40, and raked in some US$30mil (RM95mil) in ransom.
Over the past year, Somali pirates have hijacked everything from luxury yachts to oil tankers, defying foreign navies and holding the world to ransom over one of the planet's busiest trade routes.One noting the benefits to the local Somali economy by the influx of pirate money:
What was once a group of disgruntled fishermen has turned into a fearsome organisation which has attacked more than 100 ships this year alone and raked in an estimated 120 million dollars in ransom money.
Somali pirates captured the world's attention when they hijacked a Ukrainian cargo carrying combat tanks in September and a Saudi-owned super-tanker fully laden with two million barrels of crude two months later.Armed with rifles, grenade-launchers and grapnel hooks, the pirates have wreaked havoc in the Gulf of Aden, where thousands of merchant vessels bottle-neck into the Red Sea each year.
The cost of ransoms, delays and insurance premiums has hit the shipping industry hard, prompting some companies to opt for the longer but safer route around the Cape of Good Hope.
"This unprecedented rise in piracy is threatening the very freedom and safety of maritime trade routes, affecting not only Somalia and the region, but also a large percentage of world trade," the top UN envoy to Somalia, Ahmedou Ould Abdallah, said recently.
Somalia's increasingly brazen pirates are building sprawling stone houses, cruising in luxury cars, marrying beautiful women -- even hiring caterers to prepare western-style food for their hostages.See also "A pirate’s life is flashy in Somalia."
And in an impoverished country where every public institution has crumbled, they have become heroes in the steamy coastal dens they operate from because they are the only real business in town.
"The pirates depend on us, and we benefit from them," said Sahra Sheik Dahir, a shop owner in Haradhere, the nearest village to where a hijacked Saudi supertanker carrying two million barrels of crude was anchored last week.
These boomtowns are all the more shocking in light of Somalia's violence and poverty: Radical groups control most of the country's south, meting out lashings and stonings for accused criminals. There has been no effective central government in nearly 20 years, plunging this arid African country into chaos.
But in northern coastal towns like Haradhere, Eyl and Bossaso, the pirate economy is thriving thanks to the money pouring in from pirate ransoms that have reached C$37 million this year alone.
A Chinese naval fleet - armed with special forces, guided missiles and helicopters - set sail on Friday for anti-piracy duty off Somalia, the first time the country has sent ships on a mission that could involve fighting beyond its territorial waters.Articles noting the limits imposed on civilized countries by law, such as this one:
Decorated with colored ribbons and flowers, the three warships - two destroyers and a supply vessel from the People's Liberation Army Navy - were unmoored at the military port by crew members in white naval uniforms.
The fleet will carry about 800 crew members, including 70 soldiers from the navy's special force.
The current expedition aims to guard civilian ships from attacks by Somali pirates.
On December 25th, a German frigate off the coast of Somalia, sent its helicopter to interrupt a pirate attack on an Egyptian merchant ship. One member of the Egyptian crew had already been wounded by gunfire, but the German helicopter stopped the attack. German sailors then captured and disarmed six of the pirates. The pirates were then set free. This is because German law only allows the prosecution of pirates who are attacking Germans (or German property.) The Egyptian ship was carrying a cargo of wheat from Ukraine to South Korea.Business as usual for the pirates.
Another piece in the NY Times about how the Somali "Pirates Outmaneuver Warships Off Somalia", which is only partially true.With no instructions from the Indian government, naval officers on board the ship INS Mysore are confused about what to do with the 23 pirates and their dhow apprehended in the Gulf of Aden while repulsing an attack on an Ethiopian merchant vessel.The fact that Somalia has no real government merely adds to the confusion - and frustration.
"Since Saturday afternoon, the 12 Somali and 11 Yemeni pirates are in custody on board INS Mysore and they are being fed with rations meant for sailors," Navy officials said here on Monday.
"We have not received any instructions yet from the defence ministry or the external affairs ministry on what needs to be done with the pirates," they said
The piquant situation that INS Mysore finds itself in has been compounded as the Rules of Engagement issued to the warship before it set sail to Gulf of Aden on anti-piracy patrol duties is unclear on the course of action if it did seize a pirate vessel and sea brigands, officials said.
However, officials claimed that frantic efforts were in progress in both ministries to get a foreign port to accept the bandits for trial in their courts and were optimistic of finding a solution by Tuesday.
The only other option available to INS Mysore is to abandon its anti-piracy patrols and return to an Indian port to hand over the pirates to local authorities for trying them.
"All the initiative has been held by pirates during the negotiations. The pirates have a system for bargaining, and we've been moving accordingly. They released a few ships before Eid al-Adha; however, they later hijacked a few other ships. That's to say, they don't want to empty a pool in which they have around 30 or 40 ships," Marangoz was quoted as saying by Anatolia.Operating out of a state with no local law enforcement, and where palms are easily greased if there were, means low risk on the shore side to both the boat crews and their masters, many of whom seem to live outside Somalia anyway. Cash payments of ransom keep the leaders off the international financial radar and reporting system. Somalia's reputation as a hornet's nest is keeping foreign powers offshore and away from the pirates, recent rumblings about seeking authority to go ashore with military force aside.
"We know that there were examples in which pirates didn't release the ships after receiving money from companies as advanced payment. That's why we conduct bargaining while taking these possibilities into consideration. Experience also shows that bargaining with pirates takes approximately one-and-a-half or two months. We've been approaching the end of this process. Our sole goal is rescuing our crew safe and sound," Marangoz added.
U.S. Navy Commander of NavCent says, "US navy would go after pirates if they could be tried":The US Navy would go after pirates off Somalia if the international community came up with a process for holding and trying them as criminals, the commander of the US Fifth Fleet said on Friday.UPDATE: Some thoughts from a retired Marine general on "How to Kick Pirate Booty".
"We would follow the same manner we use down in the Gulf of Mexico in our counter-drug efforts. It's a matter of surveillance, focused surveillance and rapid action," said Vice Admiral Bill Gortney.
But without an internationally recognised legal process for trying pirates, navies have had little choice but to release those captured, Gortney told reporters in Bahrain, which hosts the US Navy's Fifth Fleet.
***
US and other navies have appeared helpless in the face of a wave of seizures of ships and hostages on the high seas by Somali pirates who have then ransomed them off.
It has not been for lack of authority to act, Gortney acknowledged, noting that the UN Security Council has extended a resolution allowing navies to take action against piracy off Somalia.
"I don't need any authorities for offensive actions against the pirates. I have all I need," he said.
"If I see a piracy event, I can engage, I can pursue, as long as I maintain positive identification on the vessel that is doing the piracy, and I can engage with lethal fire," he said.
"The problem is once I take them, and they are alive, I don't have any place to take them and hold them accountable for their action."
***
Gortney rejected direct attacks on pirate camps in Somalia as a solution because of the risk of killing innocent civilians or causing other collateral damage.
"I see people trying to look for an easy military solution to a problem that demands a non-kinetic solution," he said.
"If you are going to do kinetic strikes into the pirate camps the positive ID and the collateral damage cannot be overestimated. It's very difficult. They are irregulars, they don't wear uniforms," he said.
Gortney said he sees "some movement" internationally on tackling the adjudication issue internationally, and more countries are sending ships to patrol the sea lanes off Somalia.
Foreign Policy: During the Millennium Challenge war game of 2002, while playing the “Red” team opposing U.S. forces, you used unconventional tactics to communicate and strike by surprise, eventually “sinking” a U.S. flotilla. Drawing from this experience, as well as conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, why is it that these guerrilla strategies can catch allied forces so off guard?Lex offers up an alternative solution:
Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper: What we’re really talking about is what kind of methods folks might use that are unconventional. You struggle with words because to the person doing it, it’s not unorthodox, irregular, any of those things; it’s very normal. If you think in history, the Japanese didn’t think that kamikaze pilots were unconventional, but the U.S. did and the British did. The insurgents don’t think that IEDs [improvised explosive devices] are irregular or asymmetrical. It’s in the eye of the beholder. I think [the tactics] you’re seeing with many of these pirates—it’s not something they’ve done deliberately with relation to more modern nations—it’s what they do normally.
FP: What is it like to be fighting enemies—like these pirates—who are thinking differently than you? How do you have to think differently about your own strategy?
PVR: What we tend to do is look toward the enemy. We’re only looking one way: from us to them. But the good commanders take two other views. They mentally move forward and look back to themselves. They look from the enemy back to the friendly, and they try to imagine how the enemy might attack them. The third [way] is to get a bird’s-eye view, a top-down view, where you take the whole scene in. The amateur looks one way; the professional looks at least three different ways.
FP: Let’s imagine that there is a command structure in place mandated by the United Nations. How would that force figure out the weakness of nontraditional combatants like the pirates? Where would be the best place to strike them?
PVR: You have to understand what their methods of operation are, so you’d obviously begin with whatever kinds of intelligence you can gather. There are going to be a lot of ways to do that. Probably to a limited degree, it would be radio intercepts or communications—because they use varying means of communications. Then, having some sort of broad area surveillance for extended periods of times, you begin to see patterns. You’ve got to develop some sort of a picture of what is normal and what is not normal.
Some of those same techniques have been used for hunting the folks who put in IEDs. You watch an area long enough and you begin to see what’s not normal in the daily routine. You have to understand their method of operation and what the clues are if something is amiss. Any military unit that goes into a new area doesn’t see the subtle clues until they have been there awhile and unless they set up their intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance in order to pick those things up.
You’re talking weeks and probably months [to get a sense of the patterns], because things don’t happen every day. It’s like weather: You watch one day; it doesn’t mean anything. A week means a little bit [more]. But obviously, a month or months [of observation] means a lot. In Vietnam on the ground, we would have to be in areas for several weeks before we would begin to perceive what was normal and what was abnormal. And the longer they left [troops] in the same place, generally, the more effective they became.
With appropriate deference to the UN, I humbly offer a counter-proposal:There is certain elegance in its simplicity.
1. Build a wall around the place.
2. Come back after 50 years and build a door.
3. Wait another 50 years and open the door. Carefully.
4. Re-assess.
The issue is not whether piracy is tied to terrorism, but rather how terrorists or others might employ piratical tactics. If nonstate actors find the tactic is sound and the defense against it untenable, then it will be used to conduct similar or more spectacular operations. How would nonstate actors or other future belligerents interpret any success by the pirates? Absent an effective response to lawlessness, Somali piracy may be a prism to view potential copycat killers.
Seven lucky pirates were rescued by a Danish warship after the pirates spent several days adrift in the Gulf of Aden because the Danes complied with international law. As reported here: “Under international law, ships are obligated to help people who are distressed at sea,” the navy said. “Because the people on board couldn’t be directly connected with a criminal act, they were treated only as distressed.”
***
“Because of the weather in the area, it wasn’t possible to tow the distressed vessel,” the navy said. “For the safety of sea transport in the area, the vessel was therefore destroyed.”
The alleged pirate vessel had been adrift in Yemen waters, and the crew has now been turned over to Yemeni authorities, the navy said. The Absalon’s crew confiscated the weapons found on board.
The weapons included anti-tank rockets and machine guns, according to broadcaster TV2. The pirates had been adrift at sea for seven days, the last three days without food or water, TV2 said.
Reported as Countries can enter Somali waters to fight piracy: UN:The UN Security Council has passed a resolution permitting member countries to enter the territorial waters of Somalia to fight piracy.Actual Resolution is available here in pdf format:
The US-sponsored resolution, passed unanimously by the Security Council Tuesday, is valid for 12 months. It welcomes the recent initiatives taken by countries like India, Canada, France, Russia, Britain and the US to counter piracy off Somali coast.
The Security Council resolution is expected to come as a big help to countries like India that are fighting Somali pirates. Under international laws, naval ships are free to patrol international waters.
***
In its resolution, the Security Council called for "seizure and disposition of boats, vessels, arms and other related equipment" used or suspected of being used for piracy.
6. Welcomes initiatives by Canada, Denmark, France, India, thePart of the effort is to preserve Somali sovereign rights. Unanswered is the question of what to do with the pirates if captured. Current law applicable to the "high seas" is UN Convention of the Law of the Sea, Part VII, :
Netherlands, the Russian Federation, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States
of America, and by regional and international organizations to counter piracy off the
coast of Somalia pursuant to resolutions 1814 (2008), 1816 (2008) and 1838 (2008),
the decision by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to counter piracy off
the Somalia coast, including by escorting vessels of the WFP, and in particular the
decision by the EU on 10 November 2008 to launch, for a period of 12 months from
December 2008, a naval operation to protect WFP maritime convoys bringing
humanitarian assistance to Somalia and other vulnerable ships, and to repress acts of
piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia
***
9. Calls upon States and regional organizations that have the capacity to do
so, to take part actively in the fight against piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, in particular, consistent with this resolution and relevant
international law, by deploying naval vessels and military aircraft, and through
seizure and disposition of boats, vessels, arms and other related equipment used in
the commission of piracy and armed robbery off the coast of Somalia, or for which
there is reasonable ground for suspecting such use;
***
10. Decides that for a period of 12 months from the date of this resolution
States and regional organizations cooperating with the TFG in the fight against
piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, for which advance
notification has been provided by the TFG to the Secretary-General, may:
(a) Enter into the territorial waters of Somalia for the purpose of repressing
acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea, in a manner consistent with such action
permitted on the high seas with respect to piracy under relevant international
law; and
(b) Use, within the territorial waters of Somalia, in a manner consistent with
such action permitted on the high seas with respect to piracy under relevant
international law, all necessary means to repress acts of piracy and armed robbery
at sea;
11. Affirms that the authorizations provided in this resolution apply only with
respect to the situation in Somalia and shall not affect the rights or obligations or
responsibilities of Member States under international law, including any rights or
obligations under the Convention, with respect to any other situation, and
underscores in particular that this resolution shall not be considered as establishing customary international law; and affirms further that such authorizations have been provided only following the receipt of the 20 November letter conveying the consent of the TFG
Article 105. Seizure of a pirate ship or aircraftWhat about pirates taken in Somali waters, which, by definition are waters "in the jurisdiction of a state," failed or not? The UN boots that over to a committee:
On the high seas, or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State, every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship or aircraft taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board. The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith.
15. Notes that the 1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (“SUA Convention”) provides for parties to create criminal offences, establish jurisdiction, and accept delivery of persons responsible for or suspected of seizing or exercising control over a ship by force or threat thereof or any other form of intimidation; urges States parties to the SUA Convention to fully implement their obligations under said Convention and cooperate with the Secretary-General and the IMO to build judicial capacity for the successful prosecution of persons suspected of piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia;So the ball now is in the court of the parties to the SUA Convention to figure out the troubling legal framework with which to deal with these pirates. You can read the SUA Convention here. The SUA Convention sprang out of the hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro:
According to the provisions of the Convention, any person commits an offense if that person unlawfully and intentionally commits, attempts to commit, threatens to commit, or abets the seizure or exercise of control over a ship by force or threat of force or any form of intimidation; or commits any of the following acts if it endangers or is likely to endanger the safe navigation of that ship: an act of violence against a person on board; destroying a ship or damaging a ship or its cargo; placing or causing to be placed on a ship a device or substance likely to destroy the ship or cause damage to the ship or its cargo; destroying or seriously damaging maritime navigational facilities or seriously interfering with their operation; or communicating information he knows to be false. It is also an offense to injure or kill any person in connection with the commission or attempted commission of any of the previous offenses.Clear?
The Convention applies if the ship is navigating or is scheduled to navigate into, through, or from waters beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea of a single State, or the lateral limits of its territorial sea with adjacent States. In all other cases, the Convention also applies when the offender or alleged offender is found in the territory of a State Party other than the State in whose waters the offence occurred
***
Measures to establish jurisdiction over the offenses shall be taken when the offense is committed against or on board a ship flying the flag of the State at the Inventory of International Nonproliferation Organizations and Regimes time the offense is committed; in the territory of that State, including its territorial sea; by a national of that State; by a stateless person whose habitual residence is in that State; in an attempt to compel that State to do or abstain from doing any act; or when a national of that State is seized, threatened, injured, or killed during the commission of the offense.
Compliance and Enforcement: Once jurisdiction has been established, States shall take the offender into custody and immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts. States Parties are required to either extradite the offender in custody or submit the case for prosecution. States Parties are also required to assist each other in connection with criminal pro-ceedings brought under the Convention. States Parties are also to cooperate in the prevention of offenses by taking all practicable measures to prevent preparations in their respective territories for the commission of those offenses within or outside their territories and by exchanging information in accordance with their national laws.
SUA applies to nearly all of the attacks occurring in the Gulf of Aden, and obliges State Parties to criminalize such acts and establish jurisdiction when the offense is committed against their vessels or nationals. SUA establishes a framework whereby masters of ships may deliver suspected SUA offenders to a coastal State Party and the coastal State Party is obliged to accept custody and extradite or prosecute unless it can articulate why the Convention is not applicable. Leveraging States SUA obligations in conjunction with existing international law against piracy provides an effective legal framework to deliver an "endgame." We have worked for several months now with our partners on the Joint Staff, through the "interagency process", and with our international partners to pursue this outcome.Clearer?
As set out in Legal flaws hinder piracy fight, warn lawyers:Flaws in anti-piracy laws and their enforcement are hampering the fight against ship hijacks that have claimed 40 vessels off the Somali coast this year, maritime lawyers and officials have warned.You know, I think I've heard that before somewhere...
The complex blend of international agreements and domestic rules governing piracy has triggered disagreements about when and how other ships can intervene and what to do with suspects once arrested.
SEVEN major global shipping industry bodies - International Chamber of Shipping, International Shipping Federation, BIMCO, Intercargo, Intertanko, InterManager, International Transport Workers’ Federation – has sent an open letter to all governments urging action over piracy in the Gulf of Aden. The call on all governments, “individually, and collectively through the United Nations, to do everything in their power to counter the state of lawlessness and to restore safety of navigation in the Gulf of Aden”.More on the SUA Convention here:
***
The industry bodies stress: “These waters are strategically important for world trade; safe and unhindered passage of innocent merchant ships is essential if the needs of the nations and peoples of the world are to be safeguarded. The freedom to navigate safely on the high seas is an abiding principle of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the situation that pertains today is one of the most serious challenges to this principle to have arisen in recent years.”
***
“It is our view that immediate and decisive action is required to strike at the very heart of the armed and organised gangs that appear to be operating in the region almost with impunity. The practical and legal difficulties facing the crews of the few warships currently deployed into the area are understood only too well and it is for this reason that the following actions are identified as essential short term steps toward a lasting solution.
1. Governments are urged to commit sufficient numbers of warships, military aircraft and surveillance assets to the region and to coordinate their command and controlunder the auspices of a United Nations mandate,
2. The existing UN Security Council resolutions 1816 and 1838 must be enhanced with a further resolution with more explicit text on action required against the criminal gangs and with a time frame adequate to reaching a final solution,
3. Of equal importance is the need to establish a legal jurisdiction to bring arrested criminals to justice and subsequent punishment. In this regard States are particularly urged to review and amend national legislation to include such due process, noting their obligations under the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988 (SUA Convention).
Among the unlawful acts covered by the SUA Convention in Article 3 are the seizure of ships by force; acts of violence against persons on board ships; and the placing of devices on board a ship which are likely to destroy or damage it.
As noted here, NATO deploys naval ships for work against Somali pirates, but as set out here, its battle plan is still a work in progress:The commander of a NATO task force on its way to tackle piracy off the coast of Somalia has said he still does not know what the rules are for taking on the high-seas bandits. U.S. Admiral Mark Fitzgerald said while he was aware of where the pirates were operating, there was little he could do militarily to stop them and that guidelines on how to take them on -- including whether to shoot -- were still in the works. "You know, I don't think we've gotten the rules of engagement yet from NATO," Fitzgerald told reporters on Monday during a briefing on U.S. naval operations in Europe and Africa. "That's all still being debated in the North Atlantic Council. All we've been told is to prepare a plan to go down there. So (the rules) are going to have to be debated." Six NATO members have contributed ships, including destroyers and frigates, to a special anti-piracy task force following a request from the United Nations. The NATO group passed through the Suez Canal last week on its way to the Horn of Africa, where piracy has surged this year, with more than 30 ships seized and ransoms estimated at $18-$30 million have been paid to free hostages. There are already naval assets from Britain, the United States and Russia in the region, but the area is so vast -- more than 2.5 million square miles -- that it is almost impossible for the pirates to be stopped unless they are caught red-handed. "From a military standpoint, we certainly are limited by what we can do," said Fitzgerald. "How do you prove a guy's a pirate before he actually attacks a ship? "We have a problem from the military side at sea because we can't be omnipresent in the space, and the pirates operate at an advantage because ... they don't announce they're a pirate until they attack a ship." Security specialists say there is a window of only about 15 minutes for a navy ship to respond to a distress call and get to another ship that's being hijacked. Once pirates are on board, there's little, legally, that can be done. "You've got a very short window, a short time span, from the point where they decide to board a ship and (actually) board it. If you're not right there, there's not much you can do, and once the ship is taken hostage, then...." The Danish navy learnt to its cost last month what can happen if you do seize suspected pirates. They captured 10 people, but after holding them for six days aboard a Danish ship, the suspects were set free and put ashore in Somalia because the legal conditions surrounding their detention were unclear. Denmark's Defence Ministry said Danish law did not allow for prosecution of the men before a Danish court. The ministry said it had explored the possibility of handing them over to other countries but that was also not feasible. A senior British naval commander admitted last week that it was essentially a legal minefield trying to take on the pirates, and urged commercial ships operating in the region to hire their own private security companies to deal with the threat. Admiral Fitzgerald said the Danish experience showed how weak the impetus was going to be to capture pirates. Instead he said his task force would focus on escorting World Food Programme ships trying to deliver aid to Somalia.
