This note proposes that the solution to the rapidly escalating problem of piracy is for the U.S. government to issue the license equivalent of historical letters of marque to private actors, thereby granting them increased legal immunity and political approval to use force to protect private vessels against piracy. Letters of marque were legal commissions granted by Congress to private citizens granting them cover to engage enemies of the country. At the same time, it is important for the U.S. to regulate the forces that they sanction and this note will discuss the current state of such regulation. The legal background of authority to address pirates, emanating from customary, international, and municipal law demonstrates that, despite some potential hurdles, this proposed solution is a legally valid and efficient option. -Alexandra Schwartz from Corsairs in the Crosshairs
David Isenberg was the one that found this gem of a paper and a big hat tip to him. As you can see in the post above, I have also downloaded a copy into Scribd so you can read the whole thing. This post will be dedicated to some of the highlights of the paper that jumped out at me.
Specifically, I really liked the various legal mechanisms that Alexandra dug up and I learned some new stuff. If you are interested in the legal side of privatized anti-piracy operations, then this paper is for you.
There are a few areas that I wanted to put up for the reader to check out and note. One is the 1819 US Law titled ‘Resistance of Pirates by Merchant Vessels’. Like with the Letter of Marque, this little guy exists in the books as a vigorous means of defense that even involves capture if need be. Here it is:
The commander and crew of any merchant vessel of the United States, owned wholly, or in part, by a citizen thereof, may oppose and defend against any aggression, search, restraint, depredation, or seizure, which shall be attempted upon such vessel, or upon any other vessel so owned, by the commander or crew of any armed vessel whatsoever, not being a public armed vessel of some nation in amity with the United States, and may subdue and capture the same; and may also retake any vessel so owned which may have been captured by the commander or crew of any such armed vessel, and send the same into any port of the United States. -33 U.S.C. § 383 (2000)
The next area was in regards to the Declaration of Paris. Alexandra only confirms exactly what I have been repeating here. That the US did not sign the DoP, and that we even signed laws at that time that further enforced our right as a nation to issue LoM’s. She mentioned this law, and I had never heard of it before. Check it out:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in all domestic and foreign wars the President of the United States is authorized to issue to private armed vessels of the United States, commissions, or letters of marque and general reprisal in such forms as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, and make all needful rules and regulations for the government and conduct thereof, and for the adjudication That the authority conferred by this act shall cease and terminatethree years from the passage of this act. -An Act concerning Letters of Marque Prizes, and Prize Goods, ch. LXXXV, 12 Stat. 758 (1863) (This act was passed on Mar. 3, 1863, and provided that the authority it conferred would “cease and terminate” three years after its passage).
Alexandra also covers some of the particulars of a modern version of a Letter of Marque, and draws from a certain publication written by Robert P. DeWitte called ‘Let Privateers Marque Terrorism: A Proposal for a Reawakening’. So I will have to further research what he has to offer and get that up on blog as well. Check it out and let me know what you think. –Matt
Link to Scribd Publication here.
Edit: 11/09/2010- I wanted to add this one little piece for everyone to check out as well. The author here claimed the Spain and Britain both did not abide by the Declaration of Paris. I had never heard of Britain’s use of Prize Courts and paying prize money to folks to attack the enemy during WW 2. I am definitely trying to find out more about this.
Quote from Corsairs in the Crosshairs:
Moreover, even if one were to argue that the Declaration of Paris has become customary law, it is important to observe that many countries that signed it have continued the practice of issuing letters of marque in the modern era.
See Jacob W.F. Sundberg, Piracy: Air and Sea, 20 DEPAUL L. REV. 337, 353 (1971) (“Even after Spain, in 1908, had acceded to the Declaration of Paris of 1856 which outlawed privateering in naval war between parties to the treaty, the opinion was advanced that it is perfectly possible under general international law to issue letters of marque.”). The British navy utilized prize money to reward those who fought for them in World War II, with the British Prize Court in London awarding about $40 million dollars. Id. at 354.
