By Mel O’Brien

The ICC was established to prosecute international
criminals. The first international crime was piracy. Why, then, does the Rome
Statute not include piracy in its subject-matter jurisdiction?

The UN special envoy on maritime piracy recently proposed
the setting up of two special courts, in Tanzania
& Somalia,
in which to prosecute pirates. The reasoning behind the idea is that the number
of pirate attacks has increased dramatically over the past few years. This has
resulted in difficulties in trying all the perpetrators. Piracy is an international crime, but not all states
have the legislation to try pirates. This is despite the fact that 161 states
are parties to the Convention on the Law of Sea, which dedicates eight
provisions to combating piracy, obligating “cooperate to the fullest possible
extent in the repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place
outside the jurisdiction of any State” (Article 100).

The special envoy has estimated a cost of USD25 million. I
cannot see this amount as being anywhere near enough. Forgive me for my
scepticism over this amount, but the costs we have seen of running other international
courts and tribunals have always amounted to far more than initially predicted
(leaving courts such as the SCSL & ECCC in financial trouble).

Surely, it would be quicker and a whole lot more economical
to give the ICC, an existing institution, jurisdiction over piracy than to
establish two whole new courts just for one crime! It is an amendment that could
have been brought in at last year’s review conference. The ICC is designed to
deal with crimes “of the most serious concern to the international community as
a whole”, declaring that such crimes “must not go unpunished” (Preamble). It
cannot be denied that piracy is a grave crime that “threaten[s] the peace,
security and well-being of the world” (Preamble). So let’s save time &
resources, & hand piracy jurisdiction over to the ICC.