Maritime Piracy and Limitations of the International Law of the Sea

• Authors: Wallner Michał , Kokoszkiewicz Artur
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The primary aim of this paper is to analyse the legal definition of piracy stipulated in Article 101 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As the title of the paper itself suggests, the phenomenon of maritime piracy is examined only from the perspective of international law of the sea, which means that state municipal laws remain beyond the scope of the analysis. The authors attempt to interpret and critically assess relevant legal provisions, rather than recount in detail facts related to cases of maritime piracy or present statistics describing the scale of this phenomenon. The article is divided into six relatively short sections. Key considerations are contained within sections 3–5, which cover the relevant provisions of the Montego Bay Convention. These sections deal, respectively, with the definition of piracy, the “private ends” requirement, and the “two-vessel” requirement. The remainder of the article is divided into introduction, historical background and conclusions.

Keywords

maritime piracy; international law of the sea; United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay Convention); legal definition of piracy

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu. Wydawnictwo UMK
• Journal: Historia i Polityka
• Year: 2019
• Issue: 28 (35)
• Pages: 25-35

Contributors

author

Wallner Michał

• Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, Faculty of Political Science

author

Kokoszkiewicz Artur

• University College of Enterprise and Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences

References

• Beckman, R. (2011). The Piracy Regime under UNCLOS: Problems and Prospects for Cooperation, CIL Workshop on International Maritime Crimes, Singapore, January 2011. Retrieved from: http://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Robert-Beckman-Session-1.pdf.
• Bellish, J. (2013). A High Seas Requirement for Inciters and Intentional Facilitators of Piracy Jure Gentium and Its (Lack of) Implications for Impunity. San Diego International Law Journal, 15, 115–162.
• Bento, L. (2011). Toward an International Law of Piracy Sui Generis: How the Dual Nature of Maritime Piracy Law Enables Piracy to Flourish. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 29(2), 399–455.
• Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence against the Safety of Maritime Navigations, Open for Signature on 10 March 1988, Entered into Force on 1 March 1992, 1678 United Nations Treaty Series 221.
• Convention of the High Seas, Open for Signature on 29 April 1958, Entered into Force on 30 September 1960, 450 United Nations Treaty Series 82.
• Doby, D. (2010). Piracy Jure Gentium: The Jurisdictional Conflict of the High Seas and Territorial Waters. Journal of Maritime Law & Commerce, 41(4), 561–580.
• Dowdle, P. (2015). A Dire Need for Legislative Reform. Pace International Law Review, XXVII, 613–639.
• Dutton, Y.M. (2012). Maritime Piracy and the Impunity Gap: Insufficient National Lawsn or a Lack of Political Will? Tulane Law Review, 86, 1111–1162.
• Gorski, J. (1964). Rola i zasięg zwyczajow w świetle kodeksu morskiego. Technika i Gospodarka Morska, 1, 9–10.
• Gottschalk, J.A. et al. (2000). Jolly Roger with an UZI: the Rise and Threat of Modern Piracy. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.
• Hall, W.E. (1924). A Treatise on International Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press. IMB Piracy Reporting Centre, Piracy News & Figures. Retrieved from: http://www.iccccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/piracynewsafigures.
• Jesus, J.L. (2003). Protection of Foreign Ships against Piracy and Terrorism at Sea: Legal Aspects. The International Journal of Marine and Costal Law, 18(3), 363–400.
• Kelly, M.J. (2013). The Pre-History of Piracy as a Crime & Its Definitional Odyssey. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 46, 25–42.
• Matysik, S. (1971). Prawo morskie. Zarys systemu. T. I, Wprowadzenie, źrodła, statek morski, armator, kapitan i załoga. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
• Middleton, R. (2009). Piracy and Legal Issues: Reconciling Public and Private Interests, Conference Report, Chatham House, October 2009. Pobrane z: http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Africa/011009piracy_law.pdf.
• Nandan, S.N., Rosenne, S., (eds.). (1995). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: a commentary. Vol. 3, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Nyman, E. (2011). Modern Piracy and International Law: Definitional Issues with the Law of the Sea. Geography Compass, 5 (11), 863–874.
• O’Connell, D.P. (1982). The International Law of the Sea. Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Paige, T. (2013). Piracy and Universal Jurisdiction. Macquaire Law Journal, 12, 131–154.
• Protocol to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence against the Safety of Maritime Navigations, Open for Signature on 14 October 2005, came into force on 28 July 2010.
• Rothwell, D.R. et al. (2010). International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Shnider, S. (2013). Universal Jurisdiction Over “Operation of a Pirate Ship: The Legality of the Evolving Piracy Definition in Regional Prosecutions. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, XXXVIII, 473–569.
• Trzciński, K. (1998). Zwyczaj i prawo zwyczajowe jako źródła prawa prywatnego. Rejent, 3(83), 156–170.
• United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Open for Signature on 10 December 1982, Entered into Force on 16 November 1994, 1833 United Nations Treaty Series 397.
• Wiszniewski, J. (1977). Elementy prawa. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Identifiers

DOI

10.12775/HiP.2019.012