Maritime piracy has once again found its way onto the general public's radar. While the number of incidents has increased, for commercial shippers, protecting against piracy is not new. It is an ongoing problem, not only in the Gulf of Aden, but in many regions of the world. Piracy has led to the loss of seamen's lives, the loss of property, and the increased cost of doing business for shippers, among other consequences. By some reports, the majority of events go unreported.

How can private and public actors respond to this criminal activity on the high seas, especially off the failed state of Somalia? Several countries, including the United States, Great Britain, France, India, and China, have collaborated to patrol the corridor between the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. The UN Security Council has authorized extraordinary measures to allow these navies to act against pirates in sovereign Somali territory. This military activity has a preventative purpose. Yet as many commentators have remarked, the real challenge arises in apprehending and prosecuting pirates. What to do with pirates has become the central legal question of the current anti-piracy campaign.

On October 16 - 17, 2009, ACUNS, The American Society of International Law (ASIL) and One Earth Future Foundation (OEF) hosted a workshop at the ASIL headquarters in Washington, D.C. that sought to assess the various options that exist in international law to prosecute pirates, including the International Criminal Court, the Law of the Sea Tribunal, a special tribunal, and national prosecutions. The workshop was entitled, Suppressing Maritime Piracy: Exploring the Options in International Law.

Key questions included:

• Can the crime of piracy be added to the jurisdiction of the ICC? If so, what is the process for doing so?
• Given the politics around the 2010 ICC review conference (the possibility that the crime of aggression will be added to the ICC's jurisdiction; the desire on the part of some to add terrorism), how likely is it that the ICC might try pirates in the near future?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of using (third party) national governments to try apprehended pirates? How might universal jurisdiction work in practice with regard to the crime of piracy in the current era?
• What alternative governance options exist to prosecute pirates?
• What are the prospects for a special tribunal on piracy? How might this be established? By whom or under whose auspices? Through what processes?

Results of Workshop
From this conference, a practical method for improving prosecution of piracy emerged: equipment laws as an evidentiary standard to prove the intent to commit piracy. The One Earth Future Foundation took this conclusion and successfully promoted equipment laws as a viable alternative to a land invasion in Somalia to over 500 key contacts including: US Department of Defense, US Department of State, US Coast Guard, Indian, Kenyan, Seychelles, Tanzanian, Egyptian and Philippine embassies and officials, US Senate Foreign Relations and Judiciary staffers, Working Group 2 (legal issues) of the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, International Maritime Organization, International Maritime Bureau, UK military, UK Maritime Security Department, Lloyds Market Association, seafarer welfare representatives (Seamens Church Institute), international shipping associations (International Chamber of Shipping), trade unions (International Transport Workers Federation), UN representatives (UNODC), and think tanks (Brookings, Chatham House).

In May, OEF's equipment laws proposal was discussed at Working Group 2 (legal issues) of the UN Security Council Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, and was placed as a continuing agenda item for all future discussions. It was also mentioned in a speech by US Assistant Secretary of State, Andrew Shapiro as a viable way forward to deal with piracy. 

Workshop Report           Workshop Program            Workshop Participants