The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 24, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Canada Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Canadian Ship Fires Warning - Pirates, Seizes Weapons, and Releases Them!
Griffin    4/20/2009 11:03:21 PM
I was curious about the explanations given for the Canadian Navy coming to the aid of a tanker under attack by pirates, the firing of their weapons, boarding of the pirate vessel, seizing weapons and then releasing the pirates in their vessel.

The story line being given on Canadian TV, radio, etc. is that the navy didn't have authority to seize the pirates and ship under international law. If this is Canadian Government policy, it is need of review IMHO, but I will let others weigh in after reading the following material.
----------------------------------------------
Article100

Duty to cooperate in the repression of piracy

All States shall cooperate to the fullest possible extent in the repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State.


Article101

Definition of piracy

Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).


Article102

Piracy by a warship, government ship or government aircraft

whose crew has mutinied

The acts of piracy, as defined in article 101, committed by a warship, government ship or government aircraft whose crew has mutinied and taken control of the ship or aircraft are assimilated to acts committed by a private ship or aircraft.


Article103

Definition of a pirate ship or aircraft

A ship or aircraft is considered a pirate ship or aircraft if it is intended by the persons in dominant control to be used for the purpose of committing one of the acts referred to in article 101. The same applies if the ship or aircraft has been used to commit any such act, so long as it remains under the control of the persons guilty of that act.


Article104

Retention or loss of the nationality of a pirate ship or aircraft

A ship or aircraft may retain its nationality although it has become a pirate ship or aircraft. The retention or loss of nationality is determined by the law of the State from which such nationality was derived.


Article105

Seizure of a pirate ship or aircraft

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.


Article106

Liability for seizure without adequate grounds

Where the seizure of a ship or aircraft on suspicion of piracy has been effected without adequate grounds, the State making the seizure shall be liable to the State the nationality of which is possessed by the ship or aircraft for any loss or damage caused by the seizure.


Article107

Ships and aircraft which are entitled to seize on account of piracy

A seizure on account of piracy may be carried out only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

WarNerd       4/21/2009 4:19:20 AM
I need some context for this.  Would you please identify which document you are quoting from?
 
I suspect that the Canadian government's problems do not stem from their interpretation of this document, but from the interpretations that the courts have made of several of the international human rights treaties that they naively ratified and incorporated into Canadian law.  Basically, if they did not immediately release the pirates then they would have had to transport them back to Canada for a full trial with all the trimmings, including flying in any witnesses, plus appeals.  If convicted the pirates would have gotten a couple of years at the most, but, whether convicted or not, it would be just about impossible to deport them afterward.
 
The Europeans are in the same situation, except the French who do not accept that any else's interpretation of a treaty they signed also applies to them because their laws are superior (because they are French, of course!).  That's why they are also using catch and release, or trying not to catch them in the first place, just drive them off.
 
Quote    Reply

Griffin       4/21/2009 10:12:55 PM
 
These initially appear to be from a United Nations web site with quotes pertaining to the Law of the Sea.  The failure to act appears now to have come from NATO rules.  This keeps on getting more bizzarre all the time and speaks to the ineffectiveness of NATO political leasdership.  NATO has been in this area for years and piracy is nto a new thing.
 
Over to you.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       4/22/2009 5:23:22 AM
OK,
 
As I noted earlier, the problem is not with in the interpretation of the Law of the Sea, but with the interpretation by the courts of the meaning of various Human Rights treaties (such as the  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)), and the constitutions of the EU and Canada.  The result is that any captured pirates will automatically become an economic refugee, literally as soon as they set foot on EU or Canadian soil.
 
The result is that in order to keep from being swamped by economic refugees from Somalia the NATO governments have issued ROE's designed to avoid taking prisoners.  Since the ROE's also permit their forces only to fire on the pirates in self defense, the result is what we are witnessing here.
 
Because this situation is the result of international treaties, coming up with a solution is going to be extremely difficult.
 
Quote    Reply

strat-T21C       4/26/2009 12:30:21 AM

OK,

 

As I noted earlier, the problem is not with in the interpretation of the Law of the Sea, but with the interpretation by the courts of the meaning of various Human Rights treaties (such as the  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)), and the constitutions of the EU and Canada.  The result is that any captured pirates will automatically become an economic refugee, literally as soon as they set foot on EU or Canadian soil.

 

The result is that in order to keep from being swamped by economic refugees from Somalia the NATO governments have issued ROE's designed to avoid taking prisoners.  Since the ROE's also permit their forces only to fire on the pirates in self defense, the result is what we are witnessing here.

 

Because this situation is the result of international treaties, coming up with a solution is going to be extremely difficult.

What are the set ROE's? In the 'gan, the ROE is moot if they have a wpn and are in range of a Cdn with said wpn.

 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       4/26/2009 12:07:46 PM

What are the set ROE's? In the 'gan, the ROE is moot if they have a wpn and are in range of a Cdn with said wpn.
 
I rather doubt that.
 
In Afghanistan you can detain someone suspicious and turn him over to the local authorities to check out and release if nothing shows up.  Off Somalia there is no local authority that most western countries are willing to turn captured pirates over to, primarily due to human rights concerns about the death penalty and police torture. 

The alternative is to put the detainees on trial in a regular court of the nation that apprehended the pirates, and subject to all the procedures and laws that pertain.  While some of the requirements can make prosecution difficult, the real problem is from international human rights treaties that have been given the force of law in those countries and have been interpreted by the courts in such a way that the moment the pirate's foot touches the airport tarmac in one of those countries they cease to be pirates and become economic refugees, with all the rights and protections that pertain.
 
Political stupidity got these countries into this mess, now we will have to see if cowardly political idiots can get them back out.
 
Quote    Reply

strat-T21C       4/26/2009 2:13:09 PM



What are the set ROE's? In the 'gan, the ROE is moot if they have a wpn and are in range of a Cdn with said wpn.


 

I rather doubt that.

      I just got back from there, If they're seen,with a wpn, they die. That easy. 

In Afghanistan you can detain someone suspicious and turn him over to the local authorities to check out and release if nothing shows up.  Off Somalia there is no local authority that most western countries are willing to turn captured pirates over to, primarily due to human rights concerns about the death penalty and police torture. 



The alternative is to put the detainees on trial in a regular court of the nation that apprehended the pirates, and subject to all the procedures and laws that pertain.  While some of the requirements can make prosecution difficult, the real problem is from international human rights treaties that have been given the force of law in those countries and have been interpreted by the courts in such a way that the moment the pirate's foot touches the airport tarmac in one of those countries they cease to be pirates and become economic refugees, with all the rights and protections that pertain.

 

Political stupidity got these countries into this mess, now we will have to see if cowardly political idiots can get them back out.



 
Quote    Reply

strat-T21C    further.   4/26/2009 2:18:53 PM







What are the set ROE's? In the 'gan, the ROE is moot if they have a wpn and are in range of a Cdn with said wpn.






 



I rather doubt that.



      I just got back from there, If they're seen,with a wpn, they die. That easy. 



In Afghanistan you can detain someone suspicious and turn him over to the local authorities to check out and release if nothing shows up.  Off Somalia there is no local authority that most western countries are willing to turn captured pirates over to, primarily due to human rights concerns about the death penalty and police torture. 







The alternative is to put the detainees on trial in a regular court of the nation that apprehended the pirates, and subject to all the procedures and laws that pertain.  While some of the requirements can make prosecution difficult, the real problem is from international human rights treaties that have been given the force of law in those countries and have been interpreted by the courts in such a way that the moment the pirate's foot touches the airport tarmac in one of those countries they cease to be pirates and become economic refugees, with all the rights and protections that pertain.



 



Political stupidity got these countries into this mess, now we will have to see if cowardly political idiots can get them back out.




The base roe in theater right now is ROE 401-402, as I first said. If a person has a wpn and is within range of said wpn in relation to ISAF pers, it's dyin' time. ROE 429 is, if it looks suspitious ( spelling?, sorry, I'm a tanker lol) it's dead. It's somwhat vague at times but it works.





 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy