Piracy: Wrong signals - The Economist
As this article from The Economist points out, "The requirement to fight piracy is one of the oldest bits of international law." However, recent events have shown the world that there is no coherent legal framework for dealing with criminals operating in international waters, attacking ships from myriad ports. The conventional school of thought is that the nationality of the ship should determine who defends her. But the seas are so vast that no one nation can defend all of the commercial ships that fly its flag.
Into this fray steps the legal theory of "Universal Jurisdiction" used to prosecute crimes that affect the international community, such as genocide. Pirates, as is the genocidal despot, are deemed to be "humani generis, an enemy of mankind. As such, they fall under the jurisdiction of the UN's Convention on the Law of the Sea and can be prosecuted in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Sounds simple enough, right? The problem, according to The Economist, is that "many countries have not incorporated [the Law of the Sea] into their national legislation." Their national legislation. While the world community is standing alert ready to deal with piracy on the high seas, the UN and ICJ can do little until national governments are ready to enforce what has been agreed upon in New York.