O.K., if I’m in a speedboat in international waters with a big sign that says “My boat has loads of cocaine on board!” can the coast guard stop me? I assume they can, but under whose authority? What if I’m operating a floating whore house/ crack house that rich people come out to so they can party? Is it legal, assuming I can register it with a drug/ sex friendly country like the Netherlands?
No, a particular country’s coast guard cannot stop you. The problem is that unless you’re Captain Nemo you’ll have to touch land at some point.
What about other crimes in international areas? If a murder, threft, assault, whatever, is committed in the mid-Atlantic, for example, either on a boat or plane, can anyone prosecute it once they reach port?
Crimes committed on international waters are tried in the country of the accused person. That way you don’t have to be worried about being hauled into Liberia or Panama all the time for crimes.
Actually Keeves, I specifically avoided these crimes because I know I read somewhere that there are certain agreed upon statutes for capital crimes like murder and even lesser crimes like theft (or else why wouldn’t pirates operate out in the open?) I specically picked the so called ‘victimless crimes’ because I thought they might be under the radar of any specific country’s laws. Also, Arnold W., why can’t I dock at any country I choose. As long as the drugs stay out at sea on a well guarded dingy, and no one has sex while in port, what crime is prosecutable? Or is my ‘intent’ to go back out to sea to commit a crime of that country an actual crime in and of itself? If so, how do those cruises that offer gambling on the high seas work?
I believe that the Coast Guard can haul anyone off if they are flying the U.S. flag.
Yarster, I am not an expert. Someone will come along and give you the correct answer. What I meant to say is e.g. if I’m on a Chilean registered ship in international waters off the coast of California, the USA Coast Guard cannot come and arrest me for having marijuana on board.
As far as docking at any country you choose,
a) Some countries may not allow you to dock, and
b) Most countries will have extradition treaties with the country that wants to prosecute you, so someone from Interpol might be there to take you away.
Hi Arnold! How are you dear??
I was reading the Coast Guard Web site regarding drug interdiction (conveniently located at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-o/g-opl/mle/drugs.htm )and it appeared that as long as you are in waters where the US has jurisdiction, they can nab you.
Cool site, btw. Lots of interesting stuff.
Anyway, http://www.uscgboating.org/fedreq/page0.htm here are the federal boarding requirements, and a link http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/14/89.html to Section 89 of the US Code that addresses it.
I gather rain…
We all know that the US Coast Guard does stop ships in international waters and seize drugs. I think this is some customs issue that lets them clear a ship through customs before it reaches the US.
Can you claim you were on your way to Canada, were smuggling the drugs to Canada, were never in US waters, and get them to send you to Canada for trial?
Hello Missy! I’ve missed you. (pun)
Missy, starfish, it seems from Missy2U’s flags that the Coast Guard can and does stop boats in international waters, but I’m sure (without any evidence to back it up. sue me!) that this only applies to boats that have a ship registry in the USA.
If I’m wrong, I promise to never ever post off the cuff again in General Questions.
Has anybody seen jti, lately? I believe he’s an expert on Admiralty law. This sort of question is right up his alley.
Wow! Ursa Major, one of the gods of the SDMB, calls me an expert and invokes me. I’d better get this right.
First off, I’m not an expert in admiralty: I’ve only got a smattering of knowledge in this area. And, second disclaimer, I’ve got no idea how it works in the US – I can give some comments on Anglo-Canadian legal principles, but don’t know to what extent the US system works the same way (Bricker? Billdo? DSYoungEsq?). That said, matters relating to admiralty and international law tend to be dealt with the same way by countries in the common law realm, since the root of our laws is the English common law, so I assume there would be similarities.
So, with the disclaimers out of the way, and using Canada as an example:
You have to bear in mind the distinction between the domestic law of a country, and the international law recognised by the community of nations. For example, Canada can pass laws that apply outside Canadian boundaries. Canadian authorities, including law enforcement authorities and the Canadian courts, will enforce extra-territorial laws, even if all the acts occurred outside the country’s boundaries.
However, the international community may not recognise the extra-territorial application of a Canadian law because it considers the law to breach international comity, or its own national sovereignty.
Shipping and international waters are particularly sensitive areas. Normally, a foreign ship within Canadian waters is subject to Canadian laws, and a ship in international waters is not. A foreign nation may be very upset if vessels of its registry or nationality are seized by Canada in international waters for purely domestic offences. Because extra-territorial application of a country’s laws can lead to disputes with other countries, most nations are cautious in enacting laws with extra-territorial effect.
Thus, the general rule in Canada is that Canadian criminal law only applies to acts committed in Canada: Criminal Code, s. 6(2). By way of exception, there are categories of offences where Canada asserts extra-territorial jurisdiction: Criminal Code, s. 7.
The first category is offences committed outside Canada that nonetheless have some link to Canada, such as offences committed on aircraft and ships registered in Canada, or certain offences committed by Canadians abroad, or certain types of offences where Canadians abroad are the victims of the offence.
The second category is offences that are recognised by the international community as offences of universal jurisdiction – any nation can try the offenders, even if there is no link to the country that has captured the suspects. The classic example of this is piracy: the law of nations has always allowed any country to try pirates that they capture, without any proof that the pirates operated in the country’s waters, or attacked the country’s ships or citizens. This flows from the nature of piracy on the high seas, and the concern that if the pirates never committed crimes in country A, they could always use country A as their refuge. This principle of universal jurisdiction has been extended to aircraft hijackings, crimes against humanity, like genocide (Israel tried Eichmann for crimes committed in Germany) and, by a recent international convention, to torturers, as a certain General Pinochet recently discovered.
So, whether the US Coast Guard can enforce US drug laws extra-territorially would depend on the authority that Congress has given the Coast Guard. Because of the need to respect international opinion, I would think that the Congress would be fairly restrained in this area, but would defer to someone who knows the details. (Sorry that after all that I have to cop out on the actual answer, but at least you know the principles now.)
Some years ago, there was a Canadian case that raised an interesting twist on this issue. A foreign vessel was in transit in international waters, loaded with illicit drugs intended for the U.S. It was driven ashore in Canadian waters by a storm. Since drug trafficking is not an international crime, like piracy, the issue arose whether they could be charged in Canada. The traffickers successfully argued that they had no intention of trafficking their drugs in Canada, but were driven ashore purely by necessity. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the defence of necessity was available in those circumstances: R. v. Perka, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232 (no internet link available).
and the stars o’erhead were dancing heel to toe
According to US Code, Title 14, Section 89:
So it looks like if it’s flying the US flag, it’s fair game regardless
thanks, waterj2. I looked at that title, but missed that section.
As I said, I’m no expert here, but I agree with your conclusion with respect to U.S. ships. I think foreign ships would be in a somewhat different position, based on the first two sentences of paragraph (a).
The “high seas” is the traditional phrase for international waters, while “waters over which the United States has jurisdiction” would be the domestic waters.
I would think that an American ship would count as being “subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operation of any law, of the United States” regardless of location, so that would suggest that the Coast Guard could stop a U.S. ship whether it’s in international or domestic waters.
But, a foreign ship would only be “subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operation of any law, of the United States” when it is actually in U.S. waters, so I would think the Coast Guard could not stop such a ship on the high seas.
The answer is that the US military, of which the coast guard is a part, will conduct any operation in any part of the globe and manufacture a justification, however farfetched, whenever it serves the purposes of the ruling class.
Let the tumbrils roll!!
Well, I think Robbespiere is fairly close to the answer. If you were in international waters, and not registered to a prominent country (one likely to stand up to the US) I’d imagine the coast guard would just do whatever they want, but perhaps only dump the drugs and confiscate the boat (giving you a mandatory flight to your country of citizenship.) Really, if they want to stop you, you can’t do a lot.
But, I think that legally, they wouldn’t be able to touch you, or the people who bought drugs from you. But, they’d be monitoring your customers, and if they came back into US waters I imagine they’d be searched and with any drug residue found, probably have everything confiscated.
If that didn’t stop the customers, and it was a high profile crime, the US would probably pass a law against its citizens participating in this kind of activity. I believe this was done with child-sex tours, where various governments have cracked down on people who procure child sex, even if that’s not a crime in the jurisdiction they do it in, arresting these people when they return from their trip.
So, if they couldn’t find a law that let them stop you or your customers, I don’t doubt they’d make one. (Assuming they couldn’t just vanish you one night.)
Another thread to read which is semi connected is the confiscated property one… If the CG could confiscate your boat and possesions, even if it wasn’t really legal, what would stop them? The standards for evidence are pretty low so they wouldn’t have to work hard to justify their actions to their superiors, especially as it would shut down your dope operation. And nobody else would bother them, knowing that to stop the US CG just invites the US navy in… (I’m sure that threatening the US CG would end up with you getting sunk, one way or another.)
Of course, if you’re not flying any flag, then anyone can board you. I’m pretty sure the Coast Guard can’t just go around and search any ship they want in international waters. Isn’t that what we use the Navy for? During the Gulf War, I seem to recall that the Navy was policing the Persian Gulf for contraband heading to Iraq. But then again, in the other Gulf, it’s the Coast Guard (with the help of the Navy, in seeming contradiction to posse comitatus laws) that stops drug runners. Certainly the drug runners aren’t dumb enough to register their ships in the US. So I’m not sure exactly how it works out.
The way I understand it is:
A merchant or civilian vessel in national waters is subject to the dual jurisdiction of its country of registry and the nation it is in. Normally the host nation will not get involved in matters aboard unless they have serious repercussions ashore. The local consul of the country of ship’s registry is the local authority aboard.
A merchant ship in international waters is subject to the jurisdiction and protection of the country of registry. Notwithstanding this, naval vessels of other nations have certain rights of boarding, inpection etc. I believe the Coast Guard are naval vessels for this purpose (in fact that is their mission: inspection etc, rather than fighting which is navy stuff)
A vessel with no flag of registry has no protection and can be detained and taken into port by any nation.
If you are registered in one country and sail the high seas with the purpose of carrying out activities which are illegal in another country, I doubt the first country would offer you much protection except consular notice, request for due process etc.
If you have a ship of contraband in international waters with the intention of unloading it in some country (they do this all the time, staying offshore and shuttling the contraband in speeboats)your ship can be seized (I am not sure of the legal justification, just that it is done).
Naval vessels are solely under the jurisdiction of their country where ever they may be and cannot be boarded or inspected (we are talking when there is no war going on).
I first learned some of this some years ago when I was studying for a captain’s license in Spain and I learnt the title allowed the owner to skipper a boat up to a cer tain size and up to so many miles off the coast. my reasoning is that since national jurisdiction ended sooner, by the time i got to that many miles, I was free to go as far as I wanted. It turned out I was wrong because, if the boat is registered in Spain it is under Spanish jurisdiction where ever it may be.
The obvious answer is to register the boat in another jurisdiction with less bureaucracy.
All these laws were made in times when there was no significant amount of small private boats so they were made with merchant ships in mind.
Now, small boat owners are registering their boats in other countries with the purpose of avoiding taxes, avoiding jurisdiction etc. European countries have been trying to deal with this for some years now but they do not seem to get anywhere.
::This is a test post. Please ignore it::
::If you see multiposts above, please ignore them, too. I’ll clean them up::
I am about 80% certain that the following is correct:
This is a touchy issue even for the Coast Guard, so they try to avoid it. If the Coast Guard detects a ship or aircraft travelling with the potential intent to smuggle goods I think what they do is chase it. When the smuggler seas (I couldn’t help myself, sorry) the Coast Guard on his tail, he typically panics and steps on it, trying to lose the Coast Guard’s aircraft/ship(s). When chasing the offender, they manouver him so that his only route of escape is closer to shore —— like herding sheep! As soon as the offender crosses into US waters far enough —— BAMMO! They overtake or incapacitate the ship/aircraft. Just in case they sink a ship/aircraft, they send in a rescue helicpter. This may not be how they always do it, but this is a real tatic, methinks!
Wood Thrush has the series Aircraft of the World and found this out by going through all eight binders, looking for Coast Guard aircraft!
To he who has lost his hope:
Please claim it at the lost and found at the front desk.
Thank you