University of Huddersfield Repository
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Huddersfield Repository Bhangal, Avinder Maritime piracy: an auto-limitation approach Original Citation Bhangal, Avinder (2016) Maritime piracy: an auto-limitation approach. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/32102/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ UNIVERSITY OF HUDDERSFIELD DOCTORAL THESIS MARITIME PIRACY: AN AUTO-LIMITATION APPROACH Author Supervisor Avinder Bhangal Professor Stuart Toddington A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In The University of Huddersfield, Department of Law May 2016 !1 Blank page !2 DEDICATION Every challenging work requires one’s own best efforts as well as guidance from elders - especially those who are very close to our hearts. This humble contribution I dedicate to my constant and loving parents, Karan and Jas, who have given me unconditional love and support. Dear Mum and Dad, it is hard to express my thanks to you in words. Your understanding, your faith, your intellectual spirit, advice and unwavering support throughout my life has been indispensable. I will always be thankful for your praise and your criticism, and for your love and trust in me. IN HONOUR OF The present, and respect for the future IN MEMORY OF My beloved Grandparents !3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Undertaking a Ph.D thesis is a marathon not a sprint. It has been a life-changing experience for me, and the most challenging activity of my life. It would not have been possible to do it without the support and guidance that I received from many people over the years. Having initially enrolled on to the LL.B course at the University of Huddersfield back in 2006, I did not imagine completing an LL.M, let alone being given the opportunity to undertake a Ph.D. The LL.M in 2012, was the beginning and some small step in to the research sphere; I did not envisage getting to the point where I would be defending a Ph.D thesis in Huddersfield several years later. A very special thanks to the Huddersfield Law Department for giving me this opportunity to carry out my doctoral research and for their financial support. In particular, I would like to express my earnest gratitude to my supervisor Professor Stuart Toddington for his patience, motivation, and wisdom. I could not imagine having a better supervisor and mentor for my Doctoral studies. The best and worst moments of my Doctoral journey have been shared with many people. It has been a privilege to spend several years in the Department of Law at the University of Huddersfield. I have grown personally and intellectually from being part of a community of colleagues, friends and scholars at Huddersfield and this experience will always remain dear to me. !4 The Library: no research is possible without the Library, the centre of learning resources. I would like to take this time to express my gratitude to all the library staff for their services. I wish to express my appreciation to all those who have contributed to this thesis and supported me in one way or the other during this journey. Above all, I owe it all to Almighty God for granting me the wisdom, health and strength to undertake this research task and enabling me to complete it. In response to numerous questions from family and friends about my future academic endeavours, a very determined English warrior and scholar once famously said: “... this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”. !5 DECLARATION I, AVINDER BHANGAL, confirm that the material contained in this thesis has not been used in any other submission for an academic award and that there is full attribution of the work of any other authors. AVINDER BHANGAL SIGNED:………………….. DATE:……………………… !6 ABSTRACT AND THESIS CLAIM This study examines the problems we face in making a coherent theoretical link between the international law of piracy and the law of the sea in the context of the rise in maritime piracy in Africa over the past three decades. It focuses on four nations affected by piracy in the Gulf of Guinea and Horn of Africa. Furthermore, the international law of piracy is concerned with two types of jurisdiction: prescriptive jurisdiction and enforcement jurisdiction. However, the law of the sea (UN Law of the Sea Convention) defines five types of jurisdiction: territorial seas, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), the continental shelf, high seas, and seabed or seafloor outside the area of claims of territorial seas under the EEZ. The above implies that where a State that has enforcement jurisdiction is unable or unwilling to enforce prescribed international laws against piracy, recourse ought to be had to a State with jurisdiction under the law of the sea. The current thesis seeks to demonstrate that maritime piracy has substantially increased in north-eastern and western parts of Africa because, albeit the development of the law of the sea has transposed towards acknowledging the rights (and obligations) of coastal States in order to defend their territorial seas with reference to the piratical incursions, not enough attention has been given to the consequences flowing from the fact that the coastal states in question do not possess the requisite resources and systems to enforce international law and/ or prosecute pirates. It is submitted here that piracy in its modern form in the Gulf of Aden and Gulf of Guinea is a transnational crime that may best be contained through a regional legal infrastructure. It is also argued that the multilateral approach of linking enforcement jurisdiction to Universal Jurisdiction is problematic since it translates into ‘relational statism’ that is, where States habitually pursue only their self-interests. As such, consistency and clarity in the international legal situation may best be achieved by recourse to a traditional ‘auto-limitation’ approach whereby jurisdiction is essentially territorial and can only be exercised by a State outside its territory where it obtains the consent of the territorial State (perhaps through Convention or Treaty) or in accordance with a permissive rule derived from international custom. Therefore the thesis of this study suggests the need for legal reform. Chapter 1 provides the background to the study as well as the framework for the research. The main research aims, objectives and research questions are addressed in Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Chapter 7 concludes the research by presenting the findings and recommendations together with an outline of the research contribution. !7 TABLE OF CONTENTS MARITIME PIRACY: AN AUTO-LIMITATION APPROACH ………………………………………………….1 DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………………….3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………..……………………..4 DECLARATION……………………………………………………………..………………….6 ABSTRACT AND THESIS CLAIM……………………………………………………….7 TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………8 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ……………………………….………12 LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………...14 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION: SCOPE OF THE STUDY…………………………………………...15 1.1 Background…………………………………………………………………………..15 1.2 Aims, Objectives and Research Questions…………………………………………...18 1.3 Methodology…………………………………………………………….……………20 1.4 Philosophy……………………………………………………………………………26 1.4.1’Modest’ Legal Positivism………………………………….……………28 1.5 The Lacuna in the Literature…………………………………………………………34 1.5.1 Table: Mapping of Original Contribution……………………………...36 1.6 Conceptual and Research Design………………………………………………....36 1.7 Chapter Outline…………………………………………………………………...38 !8 CHAPTER 2: THE EVOLUTION OF MARITIME PIRACY: A LEGAL AND HISTORICAL ANALYSIS………………………………………………………………………………….41 2.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….41 2.2 Conceptualising the Offence of Piracy……………………………………………43 2.3Some Historical Observations……………………………………………….…….49 2.4 Codification Efforts in the International Arena…………………………….……..56 2.4.1 The Implementation of UNCLOS………………………………….…………59 2.5 UNCLOS and Modern Piracy…………………………………………………….70 2.6 Summary…………………………………………………………………………..72 CHAPTER 3: MARITIME PIRACY UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION…………………………………………………………………………...74 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………74 3.2 Universal Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………….76 3.3 International Criminal Jurisdiction……………………………………………….87 3.4 The Question of Piracy…………………………………………………………...91 3.5 Summary………………………………………………………………………….97 CHAPTER 4: PIRACY IN THE GULF OF GUINEA ……………………….…………………….……99 4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….……99 4.2 The Gulf of Guinea…………………………………………….………………..101 4.3 Overview of Piracy Statistics…………………………………………….……..103 !9 4.4 Primary Actors Responsible for the Attack…………………..…………………109 4.4.1 MEND……………………………………………………………………….…….109