Michael Pinto: No more crimson piracy!

Source: business standard

Piracy on the high seas has far-reaching economic consequences

Michael Pinto /  March 26, 2011, 0:13 IST

Did it not seem strange that with so much else to occupy us, so much time was spent on pirates captured by the navy on the high seas? Yet, India is vitally concerned when acts of piracy occur almost at our doorstep. Whether the ship is Indian or foreign, it might well be carrying merchandise either meant for our consumption or bound for foreign ports with our export cargo. Acts of piracy only push up the already huge cost of freight that the country pays and make us that much less competitive in international markets.

Another factor is the huge price that is paid by those taken hostage. Hapless members of the crew can be detained for months in conditions of near starvation while the pirates negotiate ransom with the owners of the vessel. There is no guarantee that they will be released unharmed. Indeed, on more than one occasion, members of the crew have lost their lives. Apart from the strain put on freight rates by the rising costs of insurance following acts of piracy and the trauma faced by the crew who are innocent victims, repeated acts of piracy will drastically reduce the popularity of the merchant navy as a career for young people. Shortage of crew will also impact freight rates.

India is especially concerned with the last aspect, because we are the largest suppliers of trained officer manpower to the international maritime industry. It will be extraordinarily difficult to persuade young people about the attraction of a career at sea if such a career is fraught with the risk of being attacked by pirates and taken hostage, or worse. In any case, we cannot really be disinterested spectators when many of our own people are at risk from marauding pirates.

Given the stake we have in the whole business, how should policy makers react to the threat posed by piracy? Capturing pirates is only the beginning. When these pirates face trial, questions of law and jurisdiction are bound to arise: Under what law will they be tried? Does an Indian court have jurisdiction over foreign nationals captured in international waters? How does one deal with pirates captured in preventive action before an act of piracy actually took place? Can the over-burdened Indian judicial system cope with the task of trying pirates captured in different parts of the world and, in the event of conviction, is it in our interest to incarcerate large numbers of such pirates in our over-crowded jails?

Currently, police are checking whether acts of piracy can be covered under the International Maritime Organisation-mandated SUA Convention of 2002. Although this convention does cover unlawful acts against safety of life at sea, its more direct thrust is the protection of fixed platforms from any form of attack. Other pieces of legislation being examined are the Exclusive Economic Zone Act, the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. None of these directly covers acts of piracy, and even if the pirates are convicted, the question of where they should be incarcerated remains.

The threat posed by piracy is not limited to Asia or countries around the Somalia coast. It is a problem that affects every trading nation, since a huge percentage of world trade moves by sea. In today’s shrinking global space anything that disrupts the free flow of trade affects all countries. Hence the best way to tackle piracy is through international consensus. The matter can only be tackled when a respected body like the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) addresses the question.

In the aftermath of 26/11 the US actually financed urgent sessions of the IMO, so that a new code on safety in ports could be put in place and made binding on the international community. Similar urgency must be shown in respect of piracy. Can India join hands with countries like Korea or Japan — where as much as 100 per cent of trade goes by sea — to pressure the IMO to get an international convention on combatting piracy passed and ensure the accession of the majority of maritime nations to it?

An international convention will clarify how pirates once captured should be dealt with but, without cooperation between maritime nations, capture itself will become increasingly difficult. There is a limit to the reach of any navy, and the greater the distance between the scene of action and the jurisdiction of the navy concerned, the less effective will armed intervention become. Fortunately, there is a model which can easily be followed here. When the maritime world was faced with the problem of differing standards of survey among nations that made it easy for unseaworthy ships to ply their trade, it came up with the concept of Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) for port state control.

Simply put, this meant that all the countries in a particular region would follow identical rules in dealing with port state control inspection and detention of ships. They would exchange information with each other about non-compliant vessels and, through joint action, would ensure that such vessels would not be able to escape. The effect of this collective action was that ships of shame no longer had any place to hide.

The same route should be followed in respect of piracy. If countries of a region draw up MoUs to outlaw this menace, as they did for port state control, piracy cannot survive. Wherever pirates go, whichever ship they target and however swift and well-equipped they are, the might of the navy of the member-country in whose jurisdiction they operate will be used against them. Response time will become negligible and action will be very effective. The details must be worked out in a full session of the IMO, but if India along with like-minded countries does not take the initiative, there is little hope that the problem will be addressed.

The author is a former secretary, shipping, to the Government of India