The
Clingendael, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations, has recently published a report entiled as
"State or Private Protection against Maritime Piracy?" to focus on the international developments concerning regulations for private security companies (PSCs) and on the experiences of several European countries in regulating this.
The Dutch government recently announced a change in policy, moving from an absolute ban on the use of PSCs to legitimizing the use on specific vessels under specific circumstances.
On 31 May a Conference was organised by the Clingendael Institute on protection against maritime piracy. During the seminar representatives of different stakeholders in the debate were present, to discuss the existing international regulations, the experiences with regulating the use of PSCs in other European countries, and the outstanding sensitive issues such as the responsibility of the master or the extent of the use of force that is allowed in situations of self-defence and last resort.
Key findings
- The majority of Dutch ships do not make use of the protection of Vessel Protection Detachments (VPDs) . In fact only 8-10 % of the ships passing through the High Risk Areas of Somalia are both eligible and apply for VPD protection. More than 65% of the total number of ships do not even apply for VPD protection.
- The main reasons for not applying for VPD protection include the high costs and the lack of flexibility of deployment and the long application procedures, which affect competitiveness.
- Security companies that meet the highest quality standards are signatories to the international guidelines, such as the ICoC, and are certified or accredited according to government or industry-based systems such as the SAMI which checks on compliance with international guidelines. This includes aspects such as having a good track record and the capacity to make an adequate security assessment before deployment and not allowing to protection to be provided through the deployment of a team of security guards on board ships sailing under flags of states that do not allow the use of armed PSCs. As a consequence of this policy to protect the good reputation of the PSCs, shipping companies that decide to illegally hire a PSC can only turn to uncertified companies, which often do not meet the same high standards
- Data from recent years show that approximately 40-50 ships of the total Dutch fleet reflag each year. Since some ships reflag to the register of a state that also prohibits the use of armed PSCs, it is clear that not all reflagging is done out of frustration with the current Dutch prohibition on the use armed PSCs. It is unknown how many go through the reflagging procedure for exactly the reason of being able to legally hire an armed PSC.
- More and more European countries are moving towards the legalisation of the use of armed PSCs. Currently, in addition to the Netherlands, the only important European maritime countries that prohibit the use of armed PSCs are France and Germany. However, these countries are in the process of legalising the use of armed PSCs. This leaves the Netherlands as one of the only countries in Europe to adhere to a strict interpretation of the state's need to keep a monopoly on force
|
You may view the Clingendael Report "State or Private Protection against Maritime Piracy" by clicking here
Also view more information regarding the Seminar held by Clingendael onInternational trends regarding the use of private security companies for protection against maritime piracy by clicking at the following links
