rights to fly its flag, it was later ascertained that these ships were flying a convenience
flag and thus assimilated to flagless ships.
29
In other circumstances though, despite their pursuit was commenced outside
territorial sea and contiguous zone, sailboats flying Turkish and American flags
that were suspected of having disembarked migrants onshore have been intercepted
directly on the high seas. These foreign ships were seized and escorted to Italian
ports, and following further investigations, they were linked to irregular migration
events that occurred several hours earlier. These latter cases were particularly
interesting and unique from both an operational and a legal point of view. In fact,
despite the fact that there was no ‘hot pursuit’ that could be invoked by the Italian
border police, these sailboats were boarded on the high seas. Later, these ships were
conducted to the nearest Italian port without verifying the ship’s right to fly its flag
nor by requesting the authorisation from the flag State to take appropriate measures
with respect to that foreign vessel involved in migrant smuggling.
30
Eventually, these ships were seized while smugglers were arrested and charged
with facilitating the irregular entry of migrants who were found on the Italian
coastline several hours earlier. During the interviews that border police officer
carried out when the foreign ship was escorted to the Italian port, migrants were
able to recognise the smugglers who had transported them across the Mediterranean
and that had left them on the Italian coasts several hours earlier. Under such
circumstances, the Italian authorities were able to exercise criminal jurisdiction
because through the migrant’s statements it was possible to establish a connection
between the violation of Italian immigration laws that occurred in the territory of the
State and the interception of the foreign ships on the high seas.
31 Nonetheless, while
29 See the case of the vessel ANIKA-52 where a Ukrainian vessel flying a Croatian flag of
convenience was intercepted during the “Operation ZORA” while trying to smuggle migrants
across the Mediterranean Sea. A detailed description of the operation is available in Cataldi
(2016), pp. 286–291.
30 See Sentence no. 5157/2018 of the Italian Court of Cassation. Available at http://www.
cortedicassazione.it. This case involved the interception on the high seas of the sailboat named
KALA which was flying an American flag and was registered in Delaware. On the 8th June 2018,
the sailboat was intercepted on the high seas, in front of Apulian shores by the Italian border police
authorities because suspected of having disembarked migrants on the Italian territory several hours
earlier. This sentence is quite controversial because while recognizing that the boarding on the high
seas was not performed in compliance with international law provisions, the Court held that it was
possible to intercept the boat on the high seas after a hot pursuit that began in the territorial waters.
However, after reading all the acts of the trial, it emerges that the American sailboat KALA with
three Ukrainians on board was intercepted and boarded directly on the high seas without any pursuit
performed by the Italian border police authorities that began either in the territorial sea or in the
contiguous zone.
31 On the 18th March 2017, during Frontex joint operation TRITON in Sicily, a sailboat flying a
Turkish flag was boarded on the high seas by the Italian border police authorities because suspected
of having disembarked migrants on the Italian shores several hours earlier. The sailboat was
detected by a Frontex aircraft at about 40 nm from the Sicilian coasts (high seas) and then
intercepted on the high seas. Also in this case, the Turkish sailboat was detected, engaged and
boarded directly on the high seas without any hot pursuit performed by the Italian border police
13 Maritime Surveillance of the EU External Sea Borders: Extensive Approaches and. . . 229
flag and thus assimilated to flagless ships.
29
In other circumstances though, despite their pursuit was commenced outside
territorial sea and contiguous zone, sailboats flying Turkish and American flags
that were suspected of having disembarked migrants onshore have been intercepted
directly on the high seas. These foreign ships were seized and escorted to Italian
ports, and following further investigations, they were linked to irregular migration
events that occurred several hours earlier. These latter cases were particularly
interesting and unique from both an operational and a legal point of view. In fact,
despite the fact that there was no ‘hot pursuit’ that could be invoked by the Italian
border police, these sailboats were boarded on the high seas. Later, these ships were
conducted to the nearest Italian port without verifying the ship’s right to fly its flag
nor by requesting the authorisation from the flag State to take appropriate measures
with respect to that foreign vessel involved in migrant smuggling.
30
Eventually, these ships were seized while smugglers were arrested and charged
with facilitating the irregular entry of migrants who were found on the Italian
coastline several hours earlier. During the interviews that border police officer
carried out when the foreign ship was escorted to the Italian port, migrants were
able to recognise the smugglers who had transported them across the Mediterranean
and that had left them on the Italian coasts several hours earlier. Under such
circumstances, the Italian authorities were able to exercise criminal jurisdiction
because through the migrant’s statements it was possible to establish a connection
between the violation of Italian immigration laws that occurred in the territory of the
State and the interception of the foreign ships on the high seas.
31 Nonetheless, while
29 See the case of the vessel ANIKA-52 where a Ukrainian vessel flying a Croatian flag of
convenience was intercepted during the “Operation ZORA” while trying to smuggle migrants
across the Mediterranean Sea. A detailed description of the operation is available in Cataldi
(2016), pp. 286–291.
30 See Sentence no. 5157/2018 of the Italian Court of Cassation. Available at http://www.
cortedicassazione.it. This case involved the interception on the high seas of the sailboat named
KALA which was flying an American flag and was registered in Delaware. On the 8th June 2018,
the sailboat was intercepted on the high seas, in front of Apulian shores by the Italian border police
authorities because suspected of having disembarked migrants on the Italian territory several hours
earlier. This sentence is quite controversial because while recognizing that the boarding on the high
seas was not performed in compliance with international law provisions, the Court held that it was
possible to intercept the boat on the high seas after a hot pursuit that began in the territorial waters.
However, after reading all the acts of the trial, it emerges that the American sailboat KALA with
three Ukrainians on board was intercepted and boarded directly on the high seas without any pursuit
performed by the Italian border police authorities that began either in the territorial sea or in the
contiguous zone.
31 On the 18th March 2017, during Frontex joint operation TRITON in Sicily, a sailboat flying a
Turkish flag was boarded on the high seas by the Italian border police authorities because suspected
of having disembarked migrants on the Italian shores several hours earlier. The sailboat was
detected by a Frontex aircraft at about 40 nm from the Sicilian coasts (high seas) and then
intercepted on the high seas. Also in this case, the Turkish sailboat was detected, engaged and
boarded directly on the high seas without any hot pursuit performed by the Italian border police
13 Maritime Surveillance of the EU External Sea Borders: Extensive Approaches and. . . 229