May the Captain of a British registered ship register a migrant mother's baby.

[Mrnotming]

If a migrant mother rescued by a British registered ship,
gives birth on board the vessel in international waters,
may the Captain register the birth and deem the baby one of the Queen's subjects?

 

[EdWingfield]

If he was wise he'd do nothing more than contact his company immediately, and the Immigration people 24hrs before next port of call.

Getting involved with Registrars is not his business and foolishness.

 

[Mrnotming]

Hi Ed Wingfield.

Question not answered.sorry!
He/She is not necessarily answerable to a company, or agents.He may wish to observe principles of "jus soli"
He/She may not feel any of this is foolishness?
He or she may simply wish to obey the dictates of conscience?
I throw the question again open to the learned Forumites!
The answer I seek may well be a can of worms, but for whom?

 

[BobnLesley]

"...I throw the question again open to the learned Forumites! The answer I seek may well be a can of worms, but for whom?..."

People are perhaps going to be wary of giving you an answer, after EdWingfields attempt - which I thought a reasonable/sensible response - has him marked down in your book as not being a 'learned Forumite'. Then again, as you go on to imply that you're looking for a particular answer anyway, why not save the rest of us the time/effort of guessing and just post it yourself? Not considering myself particularly 'learned', I for one will immediately bow down and perhaps even prostrate myself before your display of superior knowledge.

 

[pugwash60]

The Official Log Book has a page for Births and Deaths, not, as popularly supposed marriages. I do not know whether an entry deems the entrant to be British.

 

[Uricanejack]

The Official Log Book has a page for Births and Deaths, not, as popularly supposed marriages. I do not know whether an entry deems the entrant to be British.

The most accurate answer so far.
The Master is required by law to register any births or death which occur on board. The answer to original question is must rather than may.
It is important and must be done correctly or it can lead to complications for the individual later in life.
If born on board, The birth is registered in the official log book and the paper work sent in to the registrar. Actual nationality is a more complicated issue. The location of the vessel would play a part as would flag and port of registry. And the nationality of parents.
And the British Law current at time of Birth.

 

[Thistle]

The Master is required by law to register any births or death which occur on board.
If born on board, The birth is registered in the official log book and the paper work sent in to the registrar. /QUOTE]

I'd suggest that the highlighted words should be "record" and "recorded". As you note the paperwork (a certified copy of the logbook?) should be sent to the registrar who then presumably officially registers the birth.

Next question, of course, is which registrar? Next port of call? Vessel's port of registration? Vessel's home port? Mother's home? I'd suggest, in the first instance it should be the next port of call where the registrar should be able to give a definitive answer to the OP's question ... which may be to go to a registrar elsewhere!

 

[dolphin]

will suggest to contact the vessel's owner and ask for advise from the P&I for proper way of handling - records, notifications, etc
one thing is, what is written in the books and completely different in the practice as a lot of problems/money loses are involved on account of the owners of the vessel
of course, the records in the official log book are compulsory in any case
once the migrants or stowaways are on board, it is the owners responsibilities and a lot of headache on board and in every port/s !
don't ask me, how i know !

 

[Mrnotming]

"...I throw the question again open to the learned Forumites! The answer I seek may well be a can of worms, but for whom?..."

People are perhaps going to be wary of giving you an answer, after EdWingfields attempt - which I thought a reasonable/sensible response - has him marked down in your book as not being a 'learned Forumite'. Then again, as you go on to imply that you're looking for a particular answer anyway, why not save the rest of us the time/effort of guessing and just post it yourself? Not considering myself particularly 'learned', I for one will immediately bow down and perhaps even prostrate myself before your display of superior knowledge.

Apologies to Edwingfield and in answer to BobnLesley, yes I see that the phrase all learned forumites should be changed to " all forumites".
I will not at this stage be allowed the edit.
Yes, on the basis that I am still looking for the answer to the question myself, I sought to engage the collective forum to help me?
Your offer to prostrate yourself before me is kind, but as I have not got to knowing the extent of my own ignorance yet,I feel your offer is a bit premature, if ever to be kindly fulfilled.(and Even if there was an image from "Father Ted" creeping into my imagination as I carefully considered your post)
So again sincerest apologies for error on my part in seeking to further the discussion.
I see it as a positive that you pointed this out, and thank you BobnLesley for your post.

 

[jordanbasset]

In relation to the second part of the question, the child retains the Nationality of their parents.

 

[Mrnotming]

Moving forward:
Great replies from:
Pugwash60:
Point: page for Births, Deaths, not Marriages. thank you.

Uricane Jack:
Modify Q. original from "May" to "must" i.e. the master is burdened with the task of recording the event (raised is aspect of not registering see Thistle)
certified copy of log entry to registrar(in country of ships intended next destination or to Port of ships registry Q.)
Location of vessel at time of Birth.(lat long if international waters)
Issues of Birth details and Nationality issues are separate issues.
British Law operating (time of birth) issue for Parent British Law at time of their birthQ.Nationality of Parent at time of Birth which statute.Q
Claims may occur later in the individuals life.
Note to self: Canada, Ireland, Scotland Isle of man have "special provisions"possible altered by latest Statute.

Thistle:
Highlight actions as "record" and "recorded"
as opposed to register.
A conundrum raised, to which registrar to send "record" or "register" of birth.
Dolphin:
You seem to know the real story.
migrants on board are owners responsibility.
"Charterers would not be real owners" now raised as sub question.
Later, you might like to come back with your direct experience-which I gather was not good.

Note to self: Check out if any international waters exist in the Med areas where migrant sea routes are now encountered.

Thank you all for taking the trouble to post.
I am currently looking at the statutes involved, but its like looking at a newspaper through a well poured Guinness!
Good excuse to visit the new Lexicon in Dun Laoghaire, Dublin.(formerly Kingstown)

 

[25931]

I am surprised that no one has raised the question do the same regulations apply to SSR vessels but don't ask me, I haven`t a clue.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I suspect the answer is very strongly "it all depends"! Citizenship can be acquired by several routes, and which one is relevant in a particular case strongly depends on which legal system the vessel is operating under - it will, of course, be that of the flag under which it is registered (do we know Panamanian law ?). Some one else has referred to "jus soli" - which is what the OP is thinking of; the right to citizenship of the place where you were born. However, depending on the legal system in force, this may be trumped by the nationality of parents; for example, the children of British nationals born abroad have the right to be British nationals.

Registering or recording a birth has little relevance except as evidence in later citizenship applications.

 

[BrianH]

A child born in Switzerland to non-Swiss parents assumes the nationality of the father and is not Swiss. By the same token a Swiss registered ship could not confer Swiss nationality on a baby born on board. I suspect the same would be the case if the ship was British.

In fact, the situation may well have occurred on HMS Bulwark that was active in rescuing many migrants in the Mediterranean. I must say I wondered at the migrants picked up by them and dumped on poor old Italy's overburdened and overcrowded facilities. Once aboard a UK vessel are they not the responsibility of that state? No doubt the ship was part of combined operations to rescue migrants and had Italian permission to do so but it does seem ironic that the UK is so loud in refusing any illegal Mediterranean migrants but will happily pour them onto another EU state's territory.

 

[Mrnotming]

Great replies, thank to all respondents.
The high seas aspect of any lat long birthplace, despite all joined up Exclusive Economic Zone (EEA) using up any 200 NM patches is interesting.
Israel attacked an aid convoy;many newspapers reported it as occurring on the high seas, so the following emerged:
« New post on fPixel : The dangers of having a BIG cameraHappy countries »
Israel attacked a flotilla in “international” waters? Whose water?
2 June, 2010 by François
[This article has since been updated to incorporate information from user comments]

Yesterday morning I was shocked to hear about the attack by Israel on the Mavi Marmara, a civilian ship carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. In the ensuing bloodbath 10 civilians were killed by Israeli special forces. All over the web it was reported that the ship was attacked in international waters. This is a crucially important and surprising fragment of information, but is reported widely enough to be credible: use of the term “international waters” occur on the sites of the New York Times, pravda.ru, Asia Times Online, The Guardian, the Washington Post, to name a few.


Map showing the interception site, which lies about 150km offshore.
To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare. This seems like a really stupid thing for Israel to do. Even if you discount the morality (or lack thereof) of attacking an aid convoy, surely they risk the wrath of the world for flouting international law? Turkey’s minister of foreign affairs, Ahmet Davutoglu, is on record calling this incident “tantamount to banditry and piracy; it is murder conducted by a state.”

But where are these “international waters” which Israel violated, exactly? I googled it, and it is surprisingly hard to find a good definition. Wikipedia has a nice article and coloured world map showing international waters (a.k.a. the High Seas). International water (where no country has any claim whatsoever) generally starts 200 nautical miles (370 km) offshore, but the Mavi Marmara seem to have been intercepted a mere 150km offshore (falling in Israel’s exclusive economic zone)


International waters (blue), according to Wikipedia
According to this map there are no international waters in the Mediterranean Sea! Every square inch of it seems to belong the the surrounding coastal states.


But where are the International waters where Israel stormed the ship? Turns out this map doesn't show the whole truth - see below.
So, if there are no international water in the Mediterranean, in which water did this attack take place? If not Israeli waters, then maybe in those of Egypt or Cyprus? But why then not say so directly? Or is this merely a term parroted by all the news sources to make the story sound more dramatic and controversial?

Turns out that all those news sources are right – the exclusive economic zone, although not completely neutral in terms of economic rights, cannot be enforced by the national laws of the coastal state, as stipulated in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

However, this is not only about transgressing territorial waters, but about running a blockade. A blockade is a recognized legal construct, and must be formally declared (it was), for a plausible reason (Israel gave one), and be effectively enforced (it is). But, the quarantined area may not extend too far beyond the coast, although the law isn’t specific on distance. (Many scholars interpret the language of the London Declaration to limit blockades to the standard 12 nautical miles that define territorial waters.) A longer discussion on the blockade’s legal status can be found here.

Therefore Israel’s violent “defence” of the blockade is built on shaky (international) ground.
https://francoism.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/internationalwaters_mediterranean.png
The point is: in respect of a birth there would still seem to be a right to enter in the ship's log, the lat /long on the high seas, depending of course that it was outside the 12 mile limit.

 

[Uricanejack]

I think you are confusing two completely separate issues.

What any countries military get up depends on its interpretation of its right to do so. Ultimately constrained only by what some other countries militarily is prepared to do about it.

 

[Mrnotming]

Uricane Jack,
Possibly very true,and info is harder to find about this than I would have believed.
So only the fact that there are no high sea areas on the migrant routes then emerges if you are correct?
Ah well,I may as well head for a well stocked library,in fact the Dun Laoghaire yacht clubs have a goodly stock of volumes in their libraries to peruse.thanks for the reply.

 

[alant]

A child born in Switzerland to non-Swiss parents assumes the nationality of the father and is not Swiss. By the same token a Swiss registered ship could not confer Swiss nationality on a baby born on board. I suspect the same would be the case if the ship was British.

In fact, the situation may well have occurred on HMS Bulwark that was active in rescuing many migrants in the Mediterranean. I must say I wondered at the migrants picked up by them and dumped on poor old Italy's overburdened and overcrowded facilities. Once aboard a UK vessel are they not the responsibility of that state? No doubt the ship was part of combined operations to rescue migrants and had Italian permission to do so but it does seem ironic that the UK is so loud in refusing any illegal Mediterranean migrants but will happily pour them onto another EU state's territory.

"assumes the nationality of the father and is not Swiss."

Surely nationality of the Mother, being the only blood relative guaranteed to be there at birth?

 

[BrianH]

"assumes the nationality of the father and is not Swiss."

Surely nationality of the Mother, being the only blood relative guaranteed to be there at birth?

Not quite, it is complicated - it depends.
I am no legal expert but I understand that for married parents of different nationalities with Swiss residence permission they will have a 'Family Permit' as a household and either the mother or father (usually the latter) is designated as Head of the household. It is the nationality of the head of the household that confers their nationality onto any child born to the family. For an unmarried mother, she is the Head of household and the child assumes her nationality. I think that could be different if paternity has been formally agreed and established before birth. I also think the laws vary between Cantons, so all of the above could be classed as potential BS.

 

[mjcoon]

"assumes the nationality of the father and is not Swiss."

Surely nationality of the Mother, being the only blood relative guaranteed to be there at birth?

Give or take the modern activity of surrogacy! The identity of the father may not even be known, given the incidence of rape of unprotected women...

Mike.