Indians board US flagged yacht in International waters and send crew to UAE

lw395 said:
How would a bunch of foreigners on a yacht carrying a fugitive from a third country be treated if stopped in US waters?
Click to expand...

I can't say for sure, but how does that define anything? If you care to read back, you'll see I've already suggested that US practices are sometimes very far from a savoury model. I'd also be interested in how you'd define "foreigner" in international waters. "US waters" is irrelevant if, as reported, the boarding did not take place in [Indian] territorial waters.

If you're asking me to agree that the US might treat a comparable situation zealously, then feel free to draw inferences from the sentence preceding the one you quoted.
 
Last edited:
petehb said:
Arab state law in connection with women like it or lump it is very different to what is the practice in the west, so a young woman taken away without her guardians consent falls into the realm of unlawful abduction giving the Indian navy the right to board and detain then in accordance with inter country treaties deport. You need to look at it within the context of the laws of the two countries and then how they relate to international law.
Click to expand...

I am appalled that you think this way. She was no more abducted than if she had boarded a plane in Oman or one of the Queens. The UAE has no jurisdiction over anything that was done in Oman in any event.
 
Seven Spades said:
I am appalled that you think this way. She was no more abducted than if she had boarded a plane in Oman or one of the Queens. The UAE has no jurisdiction over anything that was done in Oman in any event.
Click to expand...

By all accounts she had a guardian and could not do anything without his permission, so even if she left on a plane or boat with the aid of others she would by UAE law have been abducted or a runaway for want of a better expression and India was legally within it's rights to board and "rescue" or recover the young woman and send her home as presumably some sort of treaty exists between the two nations and they acknowledge each others law.
The problem you have is in not acknowledging the law of the UAE and India and any treaties between them, choosing instead to apply western moral values and concepts to countries that have different values and laws. "When in Rome" applies.
 
They were not in Rome but in international waters.

You are quite right I do not accept that the UAE can set the definition of abduction in this way at all. Would you feel differently if the Indian Navy had intercepted this yacht in the middle of the English Channel?

I also do not agree that the laws of the UAE apply in other countries, in this case Oman. If anything the State of Oman woudl have to decide that this woman was abducted but as you say she was not abducted but absconded but even that is a stretch.
 
Whilst intriguing, this case doesn't appear to have been reported in any "respectable" new sources. It's definitely fine lounge fodder: What could have motivated an official in the Indian coastguard to apparently deploy resources on behalf of Dubai's billionaire ruler? It's even a great movie script in the making. But does it have any implications for cruisers? Probably as many as the vanunu case had for people considering a holiday in rome with their girlfriend.
 
petehb said:
The problem you have is in not acknowledging the law of the UAE and India and any treaties between them, choosing instead to apply western moral values and concepts to countries that have different values and laws. "When in Rome" applies.
Click to expand...

We're all handicapped here by limited and (likely) partial information. But we do know, if we care to look, that Indian law is largely modelled on British law from colonial days, so not a great distance from what you're used to in the UK. Further, as I mentioned earlier, the Indian constitution specifically includes human rights protections to UN guidelines. It's difficult to reconcile that with summary deportation -- even if the alleged offenders truly had kidnapped someone.
 
Seven Spades said:
They were not in Rome but in international waters.

You are quite right I do not accept that the UAE can set the definition of abduction in this way at all. Would you feel differently if the Indian Navy had intercepted this yacht in the middle of the English Channel?

I also do not agree that the laws of the UAE apply in other countries, in this case Oman. If anything the State of Oman woudl have to decide that this woman was abducted but as you say she was not abducted but absconded but even that is a stretch.
Click to expand...

All hypothetical they were not in national waters ie the English Channel, The laws of UAE are for the UAE to decide the woman unless she had applied for political asylum was subject to the laws of the UAE, end of story. What you are suggesting is interference in another countries laws because they don't suit your sensibilities and that is a very dangerous thing to do.
 
macd said:
We're all handicapped here by limited and (likely) partial information. But we do know, if we care to look, that Indian law is largely modelled on British law from colonial days, so not a great distance from what you're used to in the UK. Further, as I mentioned earlier, the Indian constitution specifically includes human rights protections to UN guidelines. It's difficult to reconcile that with summary deportation -- even if the alleged offenders truly had kidnapped someone.
Click to expand...

It depends on the treaties between the UAE and India and I assume that there are and they include repatriation of nationals who have acted outside the UAE laws and even those who have broken UAE laws. The Indians seem to have acted based on their treaties and relations with the UAE and have not violated any facet of international or domestic law.
 
Regardless of international law, getting involved in other people's politics is always going to be risky.
We've only heard the activists side of this of course.
 
Having sailed in and out of Goa, and other Indian ports, I would be very surprised if they formally cleared out given the reported circumstances. That as a starting point would put them in a perilous position legally with the Indian Government. All other issues about the girl’s presnce on board, the actions of boarding etc fall away. If they left without clearance, with an additional person who was not on the original crew list, and did not legally leave India, it would make any search for and arrest of the vessel high likely and almost certainly legal, regardless of the flag state.
 
macd said:
Your experience may have some relevance if they'd even reached, let alone left India, pyrojames. By my reading of the accounts they were apprehended before getting there.
Click to expand...

My mistake. However, I have sailed out of Oman too, and similar issues would apply. If they didn’t clear in and picked someone up on the run, then I am surprised they got as far as they seem to have done. They must have been aware that what they were doing was dubious at best and almost certainly illegal. Nothing in the Indian response is likely to be considered illegal, even if it might have been heavy handed.
 
petehb said:
The laws of UAE are for the UAE to decide the woman unless she had applied for political asylum was subject to the laws of the UAE, end of story.
Click to expand...

Really, so I assuming you are British, are you subject to British laws whilst in Australia or New Zealand or France for that matter? Are you trying to say that all the worlds citizens are subject to the laws of their own countires wherever every they are in the world?
 
Seven Spades said:
Really, so I assuming you are British, are you subject to British laws whilst in Australia or New Zealand or France for that matter? Are you trying to say that all the worlds citizens are subject to the laws of their own countires wherever every they are in the world?
Click to expand...

You are subject to the laws of the land that you live in and in international water I suspect you are subject to the laws of your own country.
 
I think you will be subject to the law of the country you are in at the time of the alleged incident. You may be subject to the laws of the flag state of the vessel you are in while in international waters, but equally the vessel will be subject to arrest if it has been alleged to be involved in criminal activity at a previous port or in someone’s territorial waters.
 
pyrojames said:
I think you will be subject to the law of the country you are in at the time of the alleged incident. You may be subject to the laws of the flag state of the vessel you are in while in international waters, but equally the vessel will be subject to arrest if it has been alleged to be involved in criminal activity at a previous port or in someone’s territorial waters.
Click to expand...

My point, and what I consider the point, is not about powers of arrest (of boat or people). If credible information of an offence is received, of course local authorities must act. But what should follow arrest is due process, of which there seems to have been a conspicuous absence. Rendition is not due process: it's state-sponsored kidnapping. (And, to anyone so inclined, please spare us smug prejudices about the Indian judicial system: it's much like the UK's).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top