Shipping companies putting crew members at high risk against piracy, Part 3

In World War II, convoys of merchant ships running the north Atlantic were protected by destroyers, mine sweepers and anti-submarine trawlers. Today, CTF 151, the multinational naval taskforce, patrols half a million square miles of the Indian Ocean battling Somali piracy. Because of the large area, the nearest warship to a commercial ship under attack may be hours away from an effective response.

Commercial ships are left to defend themselves against machine guns and RPGs with unarmed security details, zigzagging and unproven “non-lethal” technologies such as long range acoustic devices (LRAD). Crewmembers are expected to put themselves potentially in the line of AK-47 fire armed only with a charged fire hose.

The maritime industry largely opposes arming sailors because of a raft of liability issues: What if a security guard accidentally shoots one of the good guys? What if a disgruntled crew member turns against the captain or the mate? What if an innocent fisherman is mistaken for a pirate and shot?

Not to mention the complex issue of clearing firearms into and out of foreign ports with differing port-state laws.

Ignored in the legal debate is one key question: What is the potential liability of a shipping company for sending its crew members into deadly waters with inadequate means to protect themselves? While corporate executives may be able to defend themselves with a phalanx of high paid attorneys, sailors must have a voice looking out for their legal interests, too.

1  2  3