Resolved: Pirates caught in the act should be hanged by the neck until dead.

Great Debates
1

As I’m sure the Teeming Millions are well aware, Somali pirates remain quite active off the coast of that country, routinely capturing and ransoming ships and crews. Among the many problems naval forces face in combating piracy is the lack of a functioning Somali government. There’s no place to try these men when captured, and so they’re commonly released even when caught. Then they go out and resume pirating.

I normally oppose the death penalty, and support the right of persons accused of criminal acts to a full and fair trial. However, these positions are predicated upon the belief that the courthouse doors are open and that prisons exist which are capable of (and willing to) incarcerate those convicted. That isn’t the case with Somali pirates, and it seems unlikely that it will become the case in the foreseeable future. Thus, we must either endure a certain level of piracy, or find alternative solutions to the problem.

I submit that simply enduring futher piracy is unacceptable. Pirates have been viewed as hostii humanii generis, the common enemies of mankind, for literally thousands of years. Pompey Magnus, for example, made his name by clearing the Mediterranean of pirates. (And also killing a bunch of folks for Sulla, but let’s not quibble). Pirates imperil trade, the very lifeblood of nations. Somali pirates in particular also threaten the development of their own home into a functioning state - no one, after all, wishes to invest in a country where simply bringing in goods is fraught with risk. And, of course, pirates inflict no small degree of suffering upon those they take hostage for weeks and months at a time. They don’t deliberately kill their hostages very often, but they place them in enormously dangerous circumstances - an appallingly callous disregard for human life.

I therefore would suggest that, when navies capture men either currently engaged in piracy, or clearly equipped for it (that is, traveling in small boats and armed with AK-472, RPGs, and ropes), that such navies hold a form of court-martial on board the ship itself. JAGs (or the national equivalent) on-board ship can serve as both prosecution and defense counsel. And if found guilty of piracy beyond a reasonable doubt, the men captured could be hanged. (Or shot, I suppose - but if we’re facing 18th-century naval problems, we might as well employ 18th-century means of execution).

This isn’t “the death penalty” - it’s much more akin to killing combatants who would, if released, almost certainly return to harass one’s own civilian population.

Thoughts? :wink:

2

Meh. Going through a sham trial with a forgone conclusion really doesn’t sit well with me. I’d rather see the target ships hire security forces, and repel boarders with lethal force. A few guys with rifles, maybe a grenade launcher, and a smallish deck gun or two should solve the problem.

3

It’s hard to envision captured suspected pirates being found not guilty in such circumstances. So why go through a charade of a trial?

Just kill them. If you’re going to sail such waters, carry weaponry sufficient to blow pirate skiffs to bits, and let loose as soon as an approaching vessel’s intentions are made clear. A successful capture would normally require such capacity anyway.

If a boat or two of them get away under fire, so much the better for getting the message out.

4

Perhaps … but what of those ships that cannot afford this level of armament? To say nothing of the training required to use it properly - there’s a reason that the great powers maintain entire academies dedicated to teaching men how to kill one another at sea. It’s rather more involved than carrying a concealed revolver to deter muggers on the way to the corner shop.

Further - do we really want to encourage amateurs to arm themselves with ship-to-ship weapons? A container ship or tramp freighter armed with deck guns and RPGs can engage another freighter as readily as pirates. Perhaps more so. I know you’re a strong proponent of people’s rights to arm themselves for self-defense, Oakminster - but aren’t the high seas a different and far more dangerous environment than land? I would argue that these differences require tighter controls on the use of violence, and a more complete state monopoly on the use of violence.

5

The problems here are, first, there might be hostages on the ship. It’s also possible that extenuating circumstances might excuse some of the men serving on board - for example, they may have been impressed into service. Or there might be mental illness involved. Unlikely, perhaps, but it’s worth a cursory investigation to check.

Of course, I would agree that civilized navies should take no special risk to take pirates alive. If the crews of pirate skiffs prefer certain obliteration to a trial, then they are welcome to it.

6

I have a friend who is a merchant seaman – well, sea-woman – a merchant sailor, who has argued against this based on her own experience. I will try to get her to share her thoughts with us.

7

Exactly. It’s not really a legal issue, and I don’t want to see the courts corrupted by it. But I believe in the right to self defense.

8

Whether or not you believe civilian ships should be able to defend themselves with heavy weapons, though - isn’t it problematical to say that civilians are almost alone responsible for their own safety? If, as they presently do, naval forces generally release pirates upon capture, they essentially abandon their own and other nationals to their fate, to remain free or be captured (or killed) as their own martial prowess dictates. Navies are meant to prevent precisely this state of affairs - one of their principal duties has been to stop piracy almost since people first invented navies.

Even if we permitted ships to arm themselves for self-defense, that can’t be a satisfactory solution - at best, it’s a last-ditch solution. Navies have an obligation to protect civilians from situations in which they’re called upon to defend themselves in the first place. Hanging pirates may be the best way to do that.

9

The expense of the type of arms I’m suggesting is negligible compared to the costs of operating a ship of that size. Plenty of ex-military types around to hire as ship security troops.

Engaging another freighter of similar size with small arms is sorta like two heavyweight fighters facing off with water balloons. Not worried about that. Also doing so would be an act of piracy in itself.

And you know my views on self defense. I see no reason a ship’s crew should be prevented from defending themselves and/or their ship. Not seeing any special danger here…in fact, I see less chance of hitting an innocent bystander on the high seas. There aren’t any. The only people in range of the guns would be the pirates.

10

I don’t think they are solely responsible. I think the navies of the world should be involved. And treat it as a military operation.

11

I thought it was a well established principle in international law dating back to, I don’t know, ancient Rome, that pirates were the enemies of humanity in general, and therefore, any nation had the right, and in fact, the obligation, to capture, try, and execute pirates.

12

Aside from being barbaric, I don’t think it would do much to discourage piracy. The pirates themselves are poor and desperate enough that I doubt the threat of death would be much deterrent, and the limiting factor on the number of pirates doesn’t seem to be the number of people willing to become pirates, but the amount of funding available from local warlords, who pay for the equipment and boats the pirates use in return for a cut of the money.

Plus, I’m not sure its that much of a problem. I suspect if piracy reached a level where it was starting to actually affect profits, shipowners would spring for a lot of extra security, similar to what Oakminster suggests.

13

Sink them at sea-when the word gets out (that Ahmed and Achmed havn’t come home, flush with cash)-then fewer men will decide to be pirates.
The worst thing we could do is take them to USA for trial-there, the taxpayers will pay for their representation, trial, eventual release, and welfare (while the ACLU fights for their right to stay in the USA).

14

A cite for this, please. Unless you are just making it up in a petulant, childish fashion, which I am sure you aren’t.

15

Somali pirates don’t have ships. They have small open boats.

Ships that can’t afford weapons would continue to risk seizure, as they do now, of course.

The pirates themselves aren’t trained and armed like navies, either.

What’s the alternative? A personal navy escort for each and every vessel passing the Somali coast? That’s a lot more expensive than lightly arming target ships.

16

I wonder if some pirate hasn’t realized that they can probably make more money doing bodyguard duty and hiring themselves as mercenary escorts for a shipping company by now.

17

Is Blackwater (or whatever they are called now) still available for contract work? They need some good PR, maybe they’d be willing to do a little pro bono guarding/execution.

18

I’m under the same impression. Of course, the critical word is try – justice requires a fair, impartial, and public trial.

Which gets back to the original problem: Who will conduct the trial, and where?

Given the clusterfisk that is Somalian government, I would prefer a UN-managed tribunal operating under the law of the last generally recognized Somali government (not the current one that last I heard was clinging to a few holdout cities), to give captured pirates a prompt trial, good defense counsel, and for the guilty a prompt execution.

19

I doubt most European countries would sanction a UN court that could impose the death penalty. And as per my post above, I don’t think it would do anything to solve the problem.

Ancient Roman case law is kinda irrelevant. Its pretty obvious that western nations no longer feel “obligated” to execute pirates, regardless of what Cesar would do in their situation.

I suspect the actual solution will be that global shipping just eats the small losses due to piracy. For all the bluster about “enemies of humanity”, in '07 Somali pirates made attempts on two dozen ships in the gulf of Aden, of the 21,000 ships that crossed the gulf, which has a reputation as “pirate ally”. The end result is presumably a small uptick in the cost of goods shipped through the gulf thats more or less lost in the general fluctuations of such costs do to changing fuel prices and the like.

20

Just don’t hit the white ones.