Author: Tripti Rohilla, University School of Law and Legal Studies
TO THE POINT
Maritime law, also known as admiralty law, is a specialized category of law and regulations governing nautical matters and disputes arising from activities on navigable waters. It encompasses a wide range of issues, including shipping contracts, cargo damages, vessel collisions, salvage rights, marine insurance, and the rights and responsibilities of seafarers and passengers. While national legislations regulate many aspects of maritime activity, international maritime law is shared by treaties, conventions, and customary practises which play a crucial role due to the inherently cross-border nature of maritime commerce and navigation. At its core maritime law is guided by several fundamental principles like- freedom of the sea, sovereignty and common heritage of mankind. International maritime law including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), sets the framework for resolving disputes, managing resources, and maintaining order on the world’s oceans. It is within this legal context that the global community confronts the challenges of maritime piracy and terrorism which includes offences that threaten not only individual vessels but also the stability of international trade and security. Piracy and maritime terrorism are among the most serious offences addressed by maritime law. Piracy as defined by UNCLOS refers to illegal acts of violence, detention, or depredation, committed for private ends on the high seas. Maritime terrorism while not always distinctly defined in international law, involves politically or ideologically motivated acts intended to intimidate or coerce, often targeting ship, ports, or maritime infrastructure. This article examines the legal architecture, operational realities, and emerging challenges in the global fight against maritime piracy and terrorism.
USE OF LEGAL JARGON
The principle that allows any state to prosecute piracy, regardless of where the crime occurred or the nationality of the perpetrators or victims, this is known as Universal Jurisdiction, which is codified in Article 105 of UNCLOS. The foundational treaty governing maritime conduct, including piracy, and provides definitions and jurisdictional rules is set to called as UNCLOS, Universal Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Another treaty which criminalizes acts of maritime terrorism and provide for prosecution or extradition of offenders is SUA Convention, Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation. Regional Cooperation Agreements refer as multilateral instruments like ReCAAP (Asia) and the Dijbouti Code of Conduct (East Africa), fostering operational and legal collaboration. The most important term used in the article is High Seas, which are the areas of the ocean not under the jurisdiction of any single state, where piracy typically occurs and where universal jurisdiction applies.
THE PROOF
The resurgence of piracy off the coast of Somalia, persisted attacks in the Gulf of Guinea, and high profile terrorist incidents at sea have demonstrated the inadequacies of unilateral responses. Nearly 90% of world trade moves by sea making maritime security a linchpin of the global economy. The hijacking of the MT Sirius Star and the MV Faina, both carrying critical cargo, shows the vulnerability of international shipping lanes and the need for legal and operational cooperation. The United Nations Security Council, International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and regional organisational repeatedly emphasise that no single nation can address these threats alone. The duty to corporate, as enshrined in Article 100 UNCLOS, is now a cornerstone principle in the global fight against maritime piracy and terrorism. Piracy forces vessels to reroute, avoid high-risk areas or delay voyages, leading to longer transit times and increased fuel consumption. Many shipping companies now employ private security teams or pay for naval escorts, adding further to operational expenses. While these measures can deter attacks, they also divert resources from other critical investments such as vessel maintenance and crew welfare. Sometimes, pirates kidnap crew members, demanding multi-million dollar ransoms. It causes legal and strategic risks like complex litigation and regulatory delays where piracy incidents often trigger complex legal disputes involving multiple jurisdiction, flag states, and international treaties. Legal fees, regulatory delays and unresolved jurisdictions can result in substantial financial losses and prolonged disruption to shipping schedules. Persistent piracy can make entire regions less accessible, forcing global supply chains to adapt. This not only increases transportation cost but also undermines the reliability of just-in-time delivery systems critical to modern commerce. The attacks on oil tankers and hazardous cargo vessel pose significant environmental risk including oil spill and pollution, which can result in costly cleanups and long term ecological damage. Recent years has seen a series of high-profile piracy and maritime terrorism incidents, including in March 2023, the MV Abdullah was hijacked off Somalia, resulting in a hostage situation and a $ 5 million ransom of payment, The Gulf of Guinea remains one of the most dangerous regions, with frequent kidnappings and attacks on bulk carriers, container ships, and tankers. The 2024 attack on the cargo ship Magalie in the Caribbean involved crew hostages and theft, illustrating that piracy is not confined to traditionally high-risk regions. Maritime terrorism, while less frequent than piracy, poses a severe threat due to the potential for mass casualties and major economic disruption. The linkage between pirate gangs and terrorist groups is a growing concern as skills and tactics are shared, increasing the sophistication impact of attacks.
The evidence is clear maritime piracy and terrorism inflict enormous direct and indirect cost on shipping companies, seafarers, insurers, and national economies. These crimes threaten the safety of crews, the security of cargo, and the stability of global trade. The persistent and involving nature of these threats underscores the urgent need for robust international legal mechanism and cooperative enforcement to protect the world’s ocean and the water economic lifeline they support.
Legal Frameworks
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – is the primary international legal instrument governing maritime conduct. Articles 100-107 address piracy, establishing a duty for all states to cooperate “to the fullest possible extent” in the repression of piracy. Article 101 defines piracy as illegal acts of violence or detention committed for private ends on the high seas or outside any state’s jurisdiction. However it has some limitations, they are, it does not address politically or in ideologically motivated attacks that is maritime terrorism, its definition of piracy excludes acts occurring within territorial waters (armed robbery at sea), which are under national jurisdiction. The major limitation of this is, enforcement is challenging international waters, particularly when vessels fly the flag of non- party states or when evidence and witnesses are dispersed across multiple jurisdictions.
SUA Convention 1998 and the 2005 Protocol- the SUA Convention criminalises intentional acts that threaten the safety of maritime navigation, including hijacking, attacks, and the use of ships for territorial activities. The 2005 protocol expanded the convention to cover new threats such as, the use of ships as weapon or for the transport of weapons of mass destruction. The convention obliges states to establish jurisdiction over offences prosecute or extradite offenders and cooperate in investigation.
Regional Agreements-
ReCAAP (Asia): it was established in 2006, this agreement enables information sharing, coordinated patrols, and capacity-building among 14 Asian and 6 extra-regional states.
Dijbouti Code of Conduct (East Africa): it was signed in 2009 by 20 states; this agreement focuses on information sharing, legal harmonization, and joint operations in the Western Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden.
ABSTRACT
Piracy and maritime terrorism remain formidable threats to maritime safety, international trade, and human security. This article analysis the international legal architecture countering these crimes, focusing on the interplay between universal jurisdiction, treaty obligations and regional cooperations. It examines the effectiveness of key conventions such as the UNCLOS and the SUA Convention, the role of the UN and IMO, and the operationalization of regional agreements. Through case law and recent enforcement action the article evaluates successes and persistent challenges, offering recommendation for strengthening global maritime governance.
CASE LAWS
United States v. Said (2010) – in this case Court upheld the broad definition of piracy, affirming the US’s authority to prosecute acts committed on the high seas, irrespective of nationality.
MV Alondra Rainbow Case, (1999) – it is an Indian case in which Indian authorities captured and prosecuted pirates who hijacked the Japanese vessel MV Alondra Rainbow. The case highlighted the gaps in India’s domestic legal framework at the times, as the Pirates were ultimately convicted under lesser charges. This prompted legislative reforms to align national law with international obligations.
The Enrica Lexie Incident, Italy v. India, 2012- A dispute arose over jurisdiction when Italian marines abroad the Enrica Lexie shot Indian fishermen, suspecting piracy. The Permanent Court of Arbitration affirmed that both Italy and India had concurrent jurisdiction but emphasised the need for international cooperation and adherence to UNCLOS principles.
Seychlles Prosecutions, 2011- the Seychlles, with support from the EU’s Operation Atlanta, successfully prosecuted 11 Somali pirates under UNCLOS, demonstrating the importance of regional cooperation and the exercise of universal jurisdiction in piracy cases.
CONCLUSION
International legal mechanism for countering maritime piracy and terrorism have evolved significantly, anchored by UNCLOS, the SUA convention and regional agreements. Universal jurisdiction multilateral cooperation are central to these efforts, however, legal and operational gaps persist particularly, regarding maritime terrorism and harmonisation of national laws. Effective prosecution, capacity building, and real time information sharing remain critical. Strengthening international cooperation and updating legal frameworks, and fostering regional partnerships are imperative to secure the world’s ocean against these transitional threats.
FAQs
Q1. What is the difference between piracy and maritime terrorism under international law?
Piracy, as defined by UNCLOS, involves illegal acts of violence or detention for private ends on the high seas, Whereas maritime terrorism addressed by the SUA convention involves politically or ideologically motivated acts intended to intimidate or coerce, often targeting ships or maritime infrastructure for broader strategic goals.
Q2. Why is universal jurisdiction important prosecuting piracy?
Universal jurisdiction allows any state to apprehend and prosecute pirates regardless of where the crime occurred or the nationality of the offenders or victims. This is crucial because piracy often happens outside any single states territorial waters, necessitating a collective legal response.
Q3. How do regional agreements enhance maritime security?
Regional agreements like the Dijbouti Code of Conduct and ReCAAP facilitate information sharing, joint patrols, and legal harmonisation enabling states to responsibly and cohesively to piracy and maritime terrorism threats.
Q4. What role do the UN and IMO play encountering these crimes?
The UN sets international legal standards and coordinates Security Council responses, while the IMO develops technical standards, facilitates information exchange, and supports capacity-building for member states.
Q5. How can states improve the prosecution of piracy and maritime terrorism?
States can improve prosecution by updating national laws, investing in forensic and investigative capacity, cooperating with regional partners, and ensuring that seafarers and victims are protected and supported throughout the legal process.
Q6. What are the main challenges in prosecuting maritime terrorism?
Challenges include differing national laws, evidentiary hurdles, lack of political will, and the difficulty of attributing attacks to specific groups or individuals. The absence of a universally accepted definition of maritime and terrorism further complicates prosecution.
