the court of law as the legal language of the conventions contains limitations and is
subject to interpretation and debate.
3.2.1 Gathering Evidence
Part of the due diligence performed by the authorities prior to the seizure of a
suspected vessel is the gathering of evidence that demonstrate illegal activities
carried out by the suspected pirates. This intelligence gathering includes emails,
telephone communication through use of wiretapping, video recording, and bank
account tracking to review possible illegal financial transactions.
Although the court views the intelligence gathering as a method in line with
Article 8 since it seeks the protection of national security and the greater good of the
people, it must ensure that this measure is managed adequately to ensure abuse is
curtailed if not avoided. Although this process is often supervised by an impartial
judge who ensures fairness and effectiveness of the data gathering, it would be
reasonable to ask to which extent this qualified authority can order the surveillance.
What if this judge decides to run surveillance not only on the suspected vessel but all
ships in the vicinity?
Despite the good intention of this process, such surveillance method can be
construed as a violation of the human right fundamental whereby a person’s property
is protected under Article 8 of the ECHR.
Pirates and suspected criminal caught in high sea and who are tried in the judicial
courts of the flag State enjoy the same rights as the citizen of the State. Therefore
their human rights must be preserved and any information gathering about them
must adhere to the State’s legal framework that guarantees the protection of their
privacy.
3.2.2 Interception and Boarding
When authorities suspect members aboard a vessel or a ship of wrongdoing or illegal
activities that might harm other nearby vessels, they take the action to board and
search the ship which is considered a private property and is protected under Article
8. Although they might have proof beyond reasonable doubt, some degree of force is
often utilized to ensure the takeover of the necessary vicinity of the ship. Such action
might result in ending a suspected criminal’s life thus violating Article 2 of ECHR
which clearly prohibits intentionally depriving someone’s life unless it is more than
necessary.
Another aspect of the interception that is worth noting is that once aboard the
vessel, the authorities might be inclined to negotiate the release of the hostages, a
proposition that is utterly against the position of the European governments and is
perceived to be illegal.
The Application of Human Rights and Ethics Principles to Self-. . .
401
subject to interpretation and debate.
3.2.1 Gathering Evidence
Part of the due diligence performed by the authorities prior to the seizure of a
suspected vessel is the gathering of evidence that demonstrate illegal activities
carried out by the suspected pirates. This intelligence gathering includes emails,
telephone communication through use of wiretapping, video recording, and bank
account tracking to review possible illegal financial transactions.
Although the court views the intelligence gathering as a method in line with
Article 8 since it seeks the protection of national security and the greater good of the
people, it must ensure that this measure is managed adequately to ensure abuse is
curtailed if not avoided. Although this process is often supervised by an impartial
judge who ensures fairness and effectiveness of the data gathering, it would be
reasonable to ask to which extent this qualified authority can order the surveillance.
What if this judge decides to run surveillance not only on the suspected vessel but all
ships in the vicinity?
Despite the good intention of this process, such surveillance method can be
construed as a violation of the human right fundamental whereby a person’s property
is protected under Article 8 of the ECHR.
Pirates and suspected criminal caught in high sea and who are tried in the judicial
courts of the flag State enjoy the same rights as the citizen of the State. Therefore
their human rights must be preserved and any information gathering about them
must adhere to the State’s legal framework that guarantees the protection of their
privacy.
3.2.2 Interception and Boarding
When authorities suspect members aboard a vessel or a ship of wrongdoing or illegal
activities that might harm other nearby vessels, they take the action to board and
search the ship which is considered a private property and is protected under Article
8. Although they might have proof beyond reasonable doubt, some degree of force is
often utilized to ensure the takeover of the necessary vicinity of the ship. Such action
might result in ending a suspected criminal’s life thus violating Article 2 of ECHR
which clearly prohibits intentionally depriving someone’s life unless it is more than
necessary.
Another aspect of the interception that is worth noting is that once aboard the
vessel, the authorities might be inclined to negotiate the release of the hostages, a
proposition that is utterly against the position of the European governments and is
perceived to be illegal.
The Application of Human Rights and Ethics Principles to Self-. . .
401