In an earlier post, I mused on the limits of the rule of law in wartime. A news report out of Britain makes the issue pop back up again:
THE Royal Navy, once the scourge of brigands on the high seas, has been told by the Foreign Office not to detain pirates because doing so may breach their human rights.
Warships patrolling pirate-infested waters, such as those off Somalia, have been warned that there is also a risk that captured pirates could claim asylum in Britain.
The Foreign Office has advised that pirates sent back to Somalia could have their human rights breached because, under Islamic law, they face beheading for murder or having a hand chopped off for theft.
In 2005 there were almost 40 attacks by pirates and 16 vessels were hijacked and held for ransom. Employing high-tech weaponry, they kill, steal and hold ships’ crews to ransom. This year alone pirates killed three people near the Philippines.
Just what does the Foreign office want the Navy to do? Throw a tea party?
I thought the Royal Navy sank pirate ships? This isn’t Captain Jack Sparrow we are talking about.
Here’s a good way to deal with thugs on the high seas--just sink them.
I don’t think unresisting pirates should be sunk out of hand, but surely there’s no shortage of precedent for arresting and trying them for crimes on the high seas?
I mean, if there’s any part of international law that’s settled, isn’t it piracy?
This post is not so much an argument against the application of the rule of law in wartime. It’s really just an argument against stupidity.
The Royal Navy is not in a state of war against the Pirates. Piracy is a criminal act that all states may punish under universal jurisdiction. And I hardly think that the situation in which the Royal Navy operates would forbid humane treatment of the pirates once they’re captured, and while they’re being transported back to the U.K. to stand trial. (What’s the alternative—that the Rule of Law should not apply, and the pirates should be open to torture, rape, and summary execution?)
Historically, under international law, pirates, like spies, could be summarily executed on the high seas, provided the ship wasn’t en route to somewhere where the courts might be available.
“A Piracy attempted on the Ocean, if the Pirates are overcome, the Takers may immediately inflict a Punishment by hanging them up at the Main-yard End; though this is understood where no legal judgement may be obtained; And hence it is, that if a Ship shall be on a Voyage to any Part of America, or the Plantations there, or a Discovery of the Parts; and in her Way is attacked by a Pirate, but in the attempt the Pirate is overcome, the Pirates may forthwith be executed without any Solemnity of Condemnation, by the Marine Law.” G. Jacob, A New Law Dictionary.
The law concerning piracy has been modernized somewhat. Pirates can be taken and tried by any country. In theory, there would be nothing stopping the Brits from capturing the pirates, taking them to British territory, trying and sentencing them there (Diego Garcia, say). They certainly do not have to turn them over to Somalia.
Next entry: Clintons Lie
Previous entry: Red State Update on Obama's Small Town Faux Pas
The Royal Navy died in 2007, when its sailors surrendered without a fight to an Iranian vessel, then proceeded to thank their captors for treating them so nicely. The purpose of the cruise line posing as the modern “Royal Navy” is to spread pacifist ideals by sailing to dangerous waters and doing nothing.