And so far it's you plus a couple of somali hobo's versus the rest of the world on the 'without adequate grounds'.
The rest of the world is perhaps a bit of an exaggeration; in legal circles there are people who are concerned with the increasing tendency of government and "international" organizations to act above the law. Like I said earlier, I don't care what happened to the suspected pirates.
The UN defines a pirates ship as:
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.
A pirate vessel does not need to have attacked another boat/ship to be considered a pirate vessel.
You'd have to prove that the persons involved intended to commit piracy; which is nearly impossible when the waters are patrolled by gun-toting militia protecting Somali waters from waste dumping and illegal fishing. The same equipment used for piracy is used for legal purposes by the militia.
"Without a coast guard to monitor and prevent such illegal activities, Somali fishermen began organizing and arming themselves to confront waste dumpers and to collect fees from foreign vessels taking fish out of their waters. Middleton says what began as a legitimate fight against foreign exploitation turned into a criminal enterprise when everyone discovered its lucrative potential."
If the Portland could prove intent
they would have arrested the suspected pirates. However they couldn't, so they just robbed them instead.
Diehard, have you even read the articles you are quoting? You are cherry picking words (highlighting) which are irrelevant in the context the article and other articles regarding piracy.
Article 110:
"a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, other than
a ship entitled to complete immunity in accordance with articles 95 and 96,
is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting
that:
(a) the ship is engaged in piracy"
- there were reasonable grounds for suspecting piracy- 1 large boat tethered to 1 small, fast boat is the standard MO for piracy in this region.
Article 106:
Article 106 of UNCLOS
"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."
- There were adequate grounds for seizure- in the very least they found ak47's, rpg's, grappling hooks and extra fuel. Not your standard fishing items, they are however your standard items for commiting piracy.
First of all you need to understand the law; article 110 specifically addresses the "right of visit", or in other words the right to inspect a suspicious vessel. Article 106 however specifically addresses the "liability for
seizure without adequate grounds", or in other words the right to confiscate their property. The two articles are completely independent and the right to visit does not automatically grant the right of seizing their property. Under article 110 HMS Portland was fully justified in
inspecting the Somali vessels. However since the Somalis did not qualify under the UNCLOS definition of piracy, HMS Portland was not justified in seizing the weapons and boat.
As a British official put it: “We can only arrest suspected pirates if we catch them in the act or on the point of launching an attack on a vessel. Clearly, with all the weaponry in the skiffs, there was an intent to commit piracy, but we hadn’t actually caught them in the middle of an attack so we had to release them.”
The HMS Portland did not have grounds to arrest the Somalis, and if there are no grounds for arrest there are certainly no grounds for other punitive measures.
