The Maritime Safety Committee MSC/85 of December,
2008 of International Maritime Organisation had on its
agenda piracy at sea, being the priority item. It was
IMO, which drew the attention of U N Security Council by
its assembly resolution 2005-A 979 (24). Subsequently UN
Security Council passed a resolution 1816(2008), the
mandate of which is expiring in December,
2008.
Recently a ministerial conference was held
in Nairobi to also address the issue, as piracy is
virtually uncontrollable in the Gulf of Aden. Even now
passenger vessels are being targeted. With piracy rife
off the coast of Gulf of Aden shipowners are turning to
security and private military contractors to protect
their crews and lower the cost of premium paid to their
insurance underwriters.
Due to partial failure of
Navy's to protect merchant ships in the Gulf of Aden,
many private US based contractors eg Black-water, Harts
etc are looking at raising a flotilla of armed
anti-piracy vessels for hire and deployment in the
troubled waters of Gulf of Aden. Thus, now the role of
protecting commercial vessels may be shifted from Navy
to private agencies. This is a unique development which
may have merits and demerits at large.
It is not
only the navies failure but shipping security
regulations in force. Since the last 5 years they are
white elephant failing the test posed by Somalian
piracy. ISPS was enforced mandatory by IMO on all states
under solas chapter XI in 2004, July but it has only
taxed the ship-owners and brought more fatigue to
unarmed ships security officers and it is now being
widely contested that being an ISPS compliant ship does
not mean that it is secure. With around 120 vessels
moving towards Suez or the Indian Ocean daily it is good
business for private security contractors. The
ship-owners may be too pleased to avail the services of
private contractors and under-writers will also be
satisfied to shift the cover from Hull policy to war
risk policy.
A very serious controversy has been
raised in European parliament, as EU Parliament desires
that piracy should be defined as criminal act, rather
than an act of war. Such a re-definition will enable
navies to arrest the pirates and bring them to justice,
as believed by the author of new EU
resolution.
The resolution passed by the EU
parliament Transport Committee, regrets that U N
Security Council resolution problematically treated
piracy scourge of Somalia as an act of war. The
committee urges that piracy be treated as criminal act
under International Law. EU feels that if pirates are
defined as criminals, it is easier to bring them to
justice as piracy being an "Act of War" it is more
difficult to go for legal arrangement.
The
pirates lawyers, mostly based at London, are arguing the
act by Navies was illegal under International Law.
Lawyers are seeking protection under Geneva Convention
as piracy is defined as an act of war. It is said that
London lawyers will negotiate the release of ship and
hostages and according to newspapers report the ransom
is also paid at London.
While the talks for new
UN resolution continue in co-ordination with IMO and it
appears that new resolution may establish the right of
Navies to arrest pirates and hand them over for
prosecution, either in the flag state of the ship
;taking action or a third country in the Gulf of Aden
region. It is expected that new UN resolution will
explicitly define what Naval authorities can or cannot
do.
The maritime lawyers are debating that in
terms of insurance, piracy is some time covered as war
risk, sometimes as Hull risk. The underwriters are
seeking to move cover towards war risk policies, so that
geographical restrictions can be imposed, which is more
difficult for Hull & Machinery cover under institute
Time clauses. Definitions are further complicated by the
continuing debate on the right within or outside
territorial waters.
According to certain European
laws, piracy is defined as armed robbery within
territorial waters and different laws apply. There is no
agreement yet what constitutes territorial waters, with
some in Government and academia argue in favour of
broader definition based on exclusive economic zone as
per UNCOLAS.
The International Chamber of
Shipping is pleading that EU and UN action should help
to put down a "firm legal basis" for action against
pirates. It is also debated that if pirates have links
to terrorists, the ransom payments being made at London
will become illegal under UK Law. What a paradox, we are
being advised by all to behave whilst London is said to
be hub of all negotiations for ransom, and its payment,
and London Lawyers are charging hefty sums from
shipowners and their underwriters for release of ships
and hostages.
We have to keep an eye on new UN
resolution, if the new definition covers economic zone,
our maritime security agencies will have to keep
surveillance upto 200 miles from the coast, ie to cover
upto the extent of our 5th province, thus needs for more
platforms.
Pak Navy and MSA must gear up
themselves to comply with the new expected UN
resolution. It is in our interest that UN may enhance
jurisdiction upto exclusive economic zone. Indian Navy
is active from Gulf of Oman to Gulf of Aden and they are
projecting their presence courtesy world
media.
Executive Committee Meeting of
Master Mariner Society of
Pakistan will be held at 17.30
Hrs. at Room No 18, Old Ralli
Brothers Building, Talpur Road,
Karachi.
Annual
Dinner
2011:
Master Mariners society of
Pakistan is holding it's Annual
Dinner 2011
TO HONOUROUR SENIOR
Members in recognition of their valuable
services to Pakistan Merchant Navy and to
promote professional competence to Maritime
Fraternity.
