Pirates Sentenced In U.S. Court To Life In Prison

For the first time in over two hundred years, the United States has convicted individuals on the crime of piracy. As AFP reports, five Somali suspects today each received life sentences for their attack on a an American frigate last year (the USS Nicholas, see here). In a Norfolk, Virginia, court, the individuals also received an additional 80 years apiece for other charges, for whatever that's worth.

Able prosecution using the fullest legal means possible is part of dealing with the problem. The international community must not shy away from using the clearest - and most transparent - means available to address things. The rule of law is one of the thin wedges that keeps communal cohesiveness from spiraling into anarchy.

However, I still advocate the establishment of an international admiralty court to deal with suspected pirates, as this is a unique situation in the broader scheme of things. More to come, but this is a big advance.

Piracy Charges Thrown Dismissed In Virginia

A judge in Norfolk, Virginia, yesterday dismissed piracy charges against six Somalis accused of attacking the USS Ashland last April (see my earlier post about the early stages of this incident here). As the Voice Of America reports, the reason appears to be because the men did not actually board or take control of the warship, which is what U.S. statutes define as being acts of piracy. For those who might be angered by this decision, it is important to remember a couple of things.

One is that vigilante justice - "hanging them from the yardarm", so to speak - is not the way to deal with piracy in the 21st century. Maritime criminals like pirates operate outside the rule of law. We cannot stoop to their level. The system of beliefs that supports law and order goes far beyond the confines of a Virginian courtroom. It is international, transcending borders and cultures. It's what separates the thugs and bad guys from most of the rest of us. And if we don't like the existing laws, then we can try to change them.

In the meantime, we have to work with we're given. And for the six Somalis in a Virginia prison, there are still a number of legal issues to be dealt with. I recommend checking out EagleSpeak's take on things (see here ). He's an American attorney and retired US Navy officer, after all. These guys aren't going to be chewing khat again anytime soon. I hope.

Reactions As Accused Somali Pirate Pleads Guilty In US Court

Over a year after he was apprehended by US forces in the Indian Ocean, Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse yesterday pled guilty in a New York court to charges relating to the attack on the box ship Maersk Alabama. This marks the first time in over a century and a half that the U.S. has prosecuted a piracy case in its legal system. Muse will be sentenced in October and prosecutors are expected to seek a prison term of at least 27 years. The lone survivor of the pirate gang that boarded the vessel, Muse is reported to have told the court - through an interpreter - that, "What we did was wrong. I am very, very sorry for the harm we did. The reason for this is the problems in Somalia."

In the wake of Muse's admission of guilt, one Somali source told the BBC that he has "serious concerns" about the case, and about whether foreign nations have the jurisdictional authority to try suspected pirates in their courts. Jamaal Cumar is described in the BBC report as "a US-based Somali official", though his actual capacity is not spelled out and there are few other online references to Cumar acting on behalf of the Somali government.

Cumar tells the BBC that, "he had been trying to work out why the US would have any authority to try Muse's case and those of several other suspects in custody in the US." He is quoted as saying, "The Somali government's position has always been that we questioned the jurisdiction of this case. We felt that it was an exercise in extrajudicial practice of the law and we asked the US to return those pirates back to Somalia."

What makes Mr. Cumar's media appearance odd is that he clearly has his priorities skewed. He fails to grasp the ability under both national and international laws for sovereign nations such as the United States to prosecute those accused of engaging in pirate attacks on vessels at sea, which are legally defined as incidents that happen outside the jurisdiction of littoral nations. The attack on the Maersk Alabama occurred in international waters, meaning that those involved (like Muse) have no protection from Somali laws, whatever those may be.

As well, one might think that Cumar would be more concerned about the plight of other Somalis accused of piracy. As EagleSpeak noted yesterday, a court in Yemen condemned six Somalis to death for their actions in seizing an oil tanker in April of last year (around the time the Maersk Alabama was attacked). There appears to be no media outcry from any Somali officials about that case, least of all from Mr. Cumar. As someone opposed to the death penalty for crimes like piracy, I would prefer the Yemeni officials were to do what the Americans will likely do, and incarcerate the pirates for lengthy terms. Though I would safely bet that Muse will fare much better in a US prison.

One other reaction about Muse's case comes from his mother: As reported in The Washington Post, Adar Abdirahman Hassan told the Associated Press from her home in central Somalia that she was pleading with President Barack Obama for leniency to her son. She felt that he had been "duped" into becoming involved with the attack by "adult friends" and thought that the he had pled guilty because Muse was afraid he would be sentenced to death in the US for his actions.

"Please, please President Obama," Hassan says, "Please, American people, please release my son and grant him citizenship to help us."

Somali Pirates: Indictments, Threats & Lost

Yesterday saw eleven of those Somalis recently apprehended by the U.S. Navy appearing before a magistrate in a Norfolk, Virginia, courtroom. According to ABC News, the suspects were indicted on charges that include piracy, assault with a dangerous weapon, use of a firearm during a crime of violence and attacks to plunder a vessel. The most serious charge - piracy - carries a mandatory life sentence, while the others have penalties ranging from 10 to 35 years. According to media reports, one of the suspects appeared using crutches with bandages on his head, while another arrived in a wheelchair because one of his legs had been amputated below the knee. The injuries are said to have been the result of alleged battles with the Navy.

Though none of the defendants entered a plea during the 90-minute hearing yesterday, it is being reported that a detention hearing will be held next Wednesday and the actual case against the men could be scheduled before the summer.

The indictments come a day after news was released that a flotilla of pirate vessels attacked an Iranian supertanker in the Gulf of Aden as the vessel was sailing to Egypt from the Kharg Island terminal in the Persian Gulf. The report says that 15 boats took part in the attack, which was thwarted when Iranian naval elements arrived on the scene. Reuters says the supertanker was carrying 300,000 barrels crude oil valued at $150 million at the time of the pirate attack.

The aborted attempt to seize the Iranian vessel follows on reports that Somalis holding the MT Samho Dream have threatened to blow that supertanker up unless the pirates receive a hefty ransom. Someone named Hashi - described as a 'pirate commander' - spoke to Reuters from the Somali town of Hobyo, saying, "We are demanding $20 million to release the large South Korea ship." (The tanker is technically a Marshall Islands vessel, being registered there. She is owned by a Singaporean firm and operated by a South Korean one.)

Blowing the Samho Dream up would be an environmental disaster, but the damage inflicted would be most terribly felt along the Somali coastline and would obviously most affect the fishery in that region. Given the likely reaction of ordinary Somalis to such an event, it's unclear whether the pirates would seriously carry through on the threat and risk turning even more of their people against them. On the other hand, we already know that pirates have been willing to intercept vessel carrying much-needed international aid to Somalia and affect the ability to feed and care for the people living there, so every threat needs to be taken seriously.

Finally, on a somewhat lighter note was the buried news of a group of suspected pirates who got lost while trying to return to Somalia after an unsuccessful hunting trip. As the Reuters report printed in The Vancouver Sun says, the group was heading back towards Hobyo from somewhere near the Seychelles when they ran out of water and food. One of the would-be pirates, Abdulkhadir Jim'ale, says that in the course of their nighttime passage home, they somehow ended up "in a shiny city with lights." Turns out the gang had missed Hobyo - by a long shot - and were in Mombasa, Kenya. The suspected pirates tossed their weapons overboard, beached their boat and disappeared into the city. Jim'ale and four of his colleagues are now back in Somalia, while three others were still missing at the time of the report. This gives you an idea of how porous the coastline and borders of East Africa are. It is also noted that Jim'ale was one of 23 suspected pirates released by the Seychelles last September.

Prosecuting Pirates & Going After The Money Trail

A few weeks ago, I wondered what the United States would do in the wake of the apprehension of five suspected pirates by the crew of the frigate USS Nicholas, stating, "We must prosecute these criminals, wherever we can. If it takes bringing them thousands of miles from Somalia to face a judge, then so be it." I wrote that post worrying that suspected pirates would end up being sent home to Somalia, another manifestation of the 'catch and release' scenarios that have been too common in the past few years. Hopefully, this may not be the case.

It is being reported that the five men captured by the Americans may be sent to the U.S. to face criminal proceedings, probably in a federal court in Virginia (this is because the suspects attacked the USS Nicholas, which is homeported in Norfolk, Virginia). As for 16 other individuals currently being held by the US Navy aboard ships off the Horn of Africa, the CNN report says that 10 may be sent to Oman - because they had attacked an Omani-flagged vessel - while the remaining six may also end up in the U.S.

At the same time, other media reports say that Germany is preparing to prosecute 10 suspected pirates who had commandeered the German container ship MV Taipan, before being captured by Dutch marines. Those ten men have been flown to Europe by the Dutch and will be turned over to German authorities shortly.

Meanwhile, it also being reported that U.S. president Barack Obama has authorized the Treasury Department to go after the financial assets of individuals believed to be involved with piracy off Somalia (you can download the press release here). In the press release, the American president says that, "The deterioration of the security situation and the persistence of violence in Somalia, and acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia...constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat." It is also being reported that the Treasury Department has a list of names of individuals whose assets they would freeze.

Taken together, the decisions to prosecute suspected pirates and to go after the money they may have acquired from their operations constitute a positive shift towards applying the rule of law to organized criminal entities preying upon mariners in that part of the world.

And as the various means to deter piracy finally come together, it would appear the criminals involved are aware of the situation, and possibly getting desperate. We've already seen pirates striking every further out to sea, into remote parts of the Indian Ocean. AllAfrica.com is now reporting that Somali pirates are targeting vessels hired by Somali businessmen, driving up the the price of foodstuffs in that country. Since most shipments into Somalia happen only because 'security money' has been paid to some warlord, it would seem that rival gangs are attacking these vessels, breaking whatever tacit agreement has existed between the groups previously.

US Navy Captures Pirates: Now What?

USS Nicholas (USN photo)

In the wake of today’s gun battle between suspected Somali pirates and the American frigate USS Nicholas, which resulted in the apprehension of five individuals, the question now arises as to what the U.S. government intends to now do. Catch and release does not appear to be an option, not after the frigate sank the would-be pirates’ mothership and skiff, so it would seem the suspects could be facing a tribunal somewhere.

One idea of how the United States will proceed with prosecuting pirates comes from a speech given yesterday by Andrew J. Shapiro, the US State Department’s Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs. Shapiro was speaking at the American University Law Review Symposium in Washington about how he believes international judiciary can address piracy. Early into his talk, entitled ‘Counter-Piracy Policy: Delivering Judicial Consequences’ (full text available here), Shapiro quotes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s comment from a year ago – after the Maersk Alabama incident – in which she said, “We may be dealing with a 17^th century crime, but we need to bring 21^st century solutions to bear.” Given today’s events, one would hope that the Assistant Secretary’s talk would reveal some new ideas about how the international community, including the U.S., can deal with the problem.

Unfortunately, Shapiro’s speech failed to lay out anything particularly new or groundbreaking in terms of American policy vis-à-vis piracy. There are the usual ideas about involving the international community more actively, getting the shipping world to take better precautions and supporting nations like Kenya and the Seychelles as they undertake criminal proceedings against suspected pirates. If this is the best that can be put forth a decade into the 21^st century by the world’s most powerful nation, then this observer thinks we’ve got some work to do.

Good intentions and international politics are a dicey mix. In speaking of an international Working Group led by Denmark that is looking at, “[E]nhancing our ability to bring pirates to justice”, Shapiro made the following comments: “The United States is among many countries actively engaged in this group’s effort to enhance our collective ability to prosecute pirates. Unfortunately, at this moment in time, that ability appears to be quite limited.”

Shapiro does offer one idea: Allowing for the possession of piracy-related equipment on, say, a skiff to infer the intent to commit a criminal act. But taking a Devil’s advocate perspective here, this seems a surprising concept. A ladder or Kalashnikov lying in a small boat off the Horn of Africa could definitely be pirate tools, but unless seen by witnesses to have been used in an attack, what court would consider them sufficient evidence to prosecute suspects.

He also makes reference to the oft-repeated problem of dealing with the multi-national nature of international shipping: “…[P]rosecuting pirates can be an incredibly complex proposition in today’s globalized world. The realities of international shipping and global commerce are such that in any given piracy case you could have suspected Somali pirates intercepted and apprehended by a British naval vessel after trying to attack a Liberian-flagged ship, owned by a Canadian company, crewed by Ukrainians, Indians, and Filipinos, with a Russian captain and carrying cargo owned by a Turkish company, en route for delivery to a company in Dubai. And the case could be taking place in a courtroom in yet another country, like Kenya or the Seychelles, which are both currently prosecuting piracy cases. The logistical and diplomatic challenges presented by such a scenario are immense.”

Now just imagine this scenario for a moment: An American-owned jet airliner under contract to an Italian firm is carrying Nigerians to Saudi Arabia. It is crewed by Canadian and Dutch citizens, and has in its holds equipment owned by a German firm. It is hijacked over the Sudan and diverted to Egypt. (Except for the hijacking part of this scenario, this is something that a colleague of mine was involved with.) Would no one deign to prosecute the hijackers? Of course not. The craft is not the issue; the crime is. And with piracy, international law does allow for the apprehension and prosecution of individuals suspected of committing such acts on the high seas (in international waters).

We must prosecute these criminals, wherever we can. If it takes bringing them thousands of miles from Somalia to face a judge, then so be it. Hoping they’ll be dealt with in an East African courtroom is wishful thinking – especially as Kenya has today announced they won’t be accepting anymore suspected pirates in their country. Besides, I – for one – do not believe the Kenyan judiciary is transparent enough to begin with.

The core issue is that thousands of mariners are being predated upon by criminal organizations who are managing to elude effective prosecution because of the fear of bringing the problem to the First World. The double standard that says that maritime piracy is less important than aerial hijackings is misguided and ignores the fact that far more people have been – and will be – the victims of pirates.

Also, a reader queried me about comments made by my colleague Roger Middleton, a British expert on East African issues, who categorized the pirates caught by the US Navy as “unsophisticated”. This may seem at odds with my own views that the pirate organizations operating from Somalia are actually quite sophisticated and that the men attacking passing vessels have considerable nautical skills. But I don’t actually think the perspectives of Middleton and I are that dissimilar: I do think the pirate groups are sophisticated, yet I agree with Middleton that some of those doing the actual attacks may be unsophisticated.

The ability to mount maritime operations up to a thousand miles from shore and the manner by which multi-million-dollar ransoms can be negotiated reveal a degree of organizational expertise that has been built up over the years. Four guys with a skiff, some fuel and AKs can’t just set out from the Horn of Africa and hope to succeed on that level. On the other hand, few – if any – of the operational pirates out there are rocket scientists. What was running through the minds of this particular group when they fired on the USS Nicholas is beyond me, but it is far from the first time that the foot soldiers of an organized criminal entity screwed up. And you can bet that their bosses back in Somalia are mightily pissed at losing five men, a mothership, skiff, weapons and other material in a supremely stupid incident.

Somali pirates free crew after seven months in captivity

AFP is reporting that that the Maltese-flagged, Greek-owned vessel MV Ariana has been freed after being hijacked off Somalia over seven months ago. The vessel's crew of 24 Ukrainian mariners - including two women - is reported to be preparing to get underway after a ransom said to amount to $2.5 million was paid to the pirates. One can only imagine what it must have been like for the crew to spend such a long time in the hands of pirates (the vessel was seized on May 2 while en route to Brazil from the Middle East with a cargo of soya beans).

The likelihood that any of the criminals who captured the Ariana will ever be prosecuted is unlikely. The New York Times posted a Reuters item on Thursday about the difficulties surrounding the setting up of an international court to deal with piracy. And though no one will say it, the crux of the matter is that nobody really cares enough to amend any statutes or jurisdiction about criminal acts like piracy and sea robbery into the 21st century. We'll spend millions deploying naval vessels and personnel to the region and fob off the main prosecutorial work of dealing with suspected pirates to places like Kenya, but not establish clear cut, international parameters and practices to effectively convict pirates.

The logisitcal nightmare of prosecuting pirates

In my last post, I talked about the comments of retired US Navy Rear-Admiral Terence McKnight, who was somewhat critical of the way that piracy off the Horn of Africa was being presented. In his talk at the US Navy Museum in Washington last week, McKnight also was quoted in Defence Professionals as saying that prosecuting detained pirate suspects is a "logistical nightmare".

He said that, "Since there is no competent government in the area of operation the pirates have to be transferred to courts that will accept jurisdiction. This requires transportation, jailing for the pirates, the gathering and securing of evidence, security escorts for the pirates and witnesses to testify in the trials, and so on."

There's an interesting piece related to this from the London Times that was posted today, by journalist Tristan McConnell reporting from Mombasa, Kenya. McConnell looks at a court case currently ongoing relating to an attack by suspected pirates on a vessel in late May of this year.

Based on my research, we should not rely on Kenya to be the judicial clearing-house for the successful prosecution of piracy convictions. The Somali system of rule of law must be reinforced, and the international community must fill the gap in the meantime. Dealing with "hostis humani generis" requires a transparent judicial system, and an international admiralty court is one option.