THE MARITIME ANTI-PIRACY ACT, 2022

Pallavi Daruka

Durgapur Institute of Legal Studies

Abstract

The Maritime Anti-Piracy Act 2022 (MAPA) is major legislation that focuses on preventing and making punishable maritime piracy in India. An important component for India to complete its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and improve upon requisite maritime security is the MAPA. This article is a comprehensive examination of MAPA, including the important components such as the meaning of piracy, its punishments, and the accessorial courts in India. It also points to the obstacles in implementing the Act, including resource crunch and the absence of coordination between instrumentalists. However, the article concludes that MAPA is a step in the right direction to combat maritime piracy in India despite its constraints. Yet it does infer the use of more rigor in marine surveillance and possibly the need for an overall strategy to bolster the Act's outcomes towards security at sea. 

Keywords

Maritime Piracy, UNCLOS, Maritime Security, Punishment, Jurisdiction.

Introduction

For years, piracy has represented a huge threat to seafarers in terms of maritime security, global trade, and safety. India approved the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act of 2022, given the necessity of cross-border comprehensive legislation to counter piracy effectively in concordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982. The Act puts in place a strong legal system to prosecute pirates and secure freedom of maritime trade, empowering Indian authorities to enforce it. 

The Anti-Piracy Act defines piracy and sits on the high seas, conferring legal sanction for the prosecution of such offenses.

It confers to set a sui generis legal framework so that piracy from Indian shores can be prosecuted in an Indian court of law bindingly.

In addition to the extended arm of maritime piracy, it punishes exceptionally by whole-life imprisonment or death in the rarest of rare cases. As a consequence of this law, India has now acknowledged in international law its obligation under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which was ratified by us in 1995.

This legislation gives the Indian Navy and Coast Guard the right to go to sea to comb for pirates, as well as within the EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) beyond the 2022 Maritime Anti-Piracy Act Structure.

The Act has 5 chapters and 15 sections, i.e., it deals with jurisdiction, offenses, penalties, mechanism of enforcing the Act, & trial procedures.

Background

Piracy is not a new issue. Piracy remains a significant problem in global shipping, especially in the Indian Ocean, which is a major global shipping route. A major increase in piracy attacks happened to occur thereafter (post-2008) in the larger expanse of the Indian Ocean region. This prompted the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to extend universal jurisdiction for the crime of piracy and requested member states to form a law within its domestic jurisdiction.

This left Indian courts dogged by various hindrances since there was no specific piracy legal regime in place. This and the growing incidence of maritime piracy and armed robbery at sea demanded legislatively separate legislation on piracy. To turn that cause into law, the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act was enacted in 2022 to implement the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and provides that every state shall cooperate in the repression of piracy on the high seas or any place outside its jurisdiction.

Objective

The Maritime Anti-Piracy Act 2022 came into force to prevent piracy on the high seas and safeguard ships, sailors, and passengers. It exactly punishes pirates who board ships and steal under Indian laws in cases where ships are attacked. The Act is not only compliant with international rules such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982 but also helps India cooperate in tackling piracy among other countries.

Section-Wise Breakdown of the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act, 2022

Sections	Title	Description	Critical Analysis	Criticisms	Solutions
1	Short Title, Commencement, and Application	The Act applies to the whole of India, all ships on the Indian register, and offenses committed on board non-Indian register ships outside India. The enforcement date is government notification.	Defines the jurisdiction clearly but depends on government action for implementation.	A notification from the Central Government would notify the enforcement of the Act. This may slow implementation and create doubts about the actual commencement of the Act.	The Act must either take immediate effect or specify a period in which the notification is to be laid to prevent the delay. Timely timelines can ensure speedy enforcement and reduce legal ambiguity.
2	Definitions	Offering legal terms for piracy, ship, territorial waters, exclusive economic zone, and armed robbery.	Non-legal clarity helps, but cyber piracy is not mentioned in the clause.	The section says that piracy, armed robbery, and associated offenses are not responding to new threats. For example, cyber piracy or technological hijacking.	Cyberpiracy and technology-based piracy methods must be added to the clause to include a heavier swath of the menace that poses today as maritime threats. Hence, the law should be flexible to change with evolving security requirements in the maritime.
3	Punishment for Piracy	Life imprisonment for engaging in piracy, and if death is caused due to that, a death penalty may be applicable.	The harsh penalties may be against human rights concerns in that they are capital offenses.	The death penalty for piracy resulting in death may even be oppressive from an international human rights framework, which discourages abolitionists.	Death penalty, other than mandatory for murder—The act should allow for (discretionary) sentencing based on the facts of the case, not a mandatory death penalty. Life imprisonment is the maximum possible penalty, with the death penalty marked only for the most heinous offenses according to the standards of international human rights.
4	Punishment for Attempt to Commit Piracy, Aiding & Abetting	Piracy or attempting to assist in piracy is up to 14 years maximum imprisonment and fine.	Includes accessories but no differentiated penalties depending on the degree of participation.	It meets lengthy terms for attempts and abetting piracy but does not alternate minor functions from major roles. It likewise fails to range the sanctions by degrees or seriousness of devotion.	In addition, a grading system for sanctions should be adopted, which would differentiate between peripheral players (lookouts and non-violent offenders) and leading actors (such as organizers). It would not make penalties more dissimilar to the reality of who is responsible for involvement therein.
5	Punishment for Organizing or Directing Others to Commit Piracy	People who plan and order piracy to happen will get lifetime imprisonment or a heavy fine.	Aims at the masterminds, but no distinction between organizers and forced participants.	Ambiguous Terminology: The phrase "organizing and directing" is somewhat ambiguous and may result in varied interpretations by the courts.	The Act should define "organizing or directing" to prevent inconsistent enforcement. Better implementation—clearer roles or examples of such roles in the context of piracy would be of help.
6	Power to Arrest and Investigate Piracy Cases	The Indian naval & coast guards can nab pirates, seize ships, and prosecute.	Increasing law enforcement could conflict with international jurisdiction norms.	This section of the Act empowers Indian authorities to both arrest and investigate piracy cases, even if that happens in the high seas or off the shore of some other country. Which can result in jurisdictional disputes between other nations and maritime supremacy bodies.	The Act must lay down governing procedures for its implementation in terms of cross-border jurisdictional issues, particularly overseas when the incident occurs outside Indian territorial waters. India can negotiate bilateral and multilateral agreements with coastal states to combat these challenges effectively.
7	Arrest of Persons and Seizure of Ships & Property	Pirates can be arrested by authorities who can be held accountable for the detention of pirate vessels and associated equipment.	It provides very broad powers but requires robust procedural protection against abuse.	Overly discretionary: Where the power to take full custody of foreign-flagged vessels or other international maritime disputes without proper checks may yield abuse.	Give judicial oversight and write a warrant or court approval for the seizure of ships and property such that they do not go against the powers. Further, explicit procedural safeguards are required to safeguard the rights of people who have been arrested or detained.
8	Designation of Special Courts	Special courts for piracy cases may be set up by the government.	Takes care of quicker trials but demands a legal system to work efficiently.	Special courts for copyright piracy cases might not be practical and sustainable unless there is a proper roadmap for their implementation.	The government would have to create a schedule so that within it these courts are developed and built, and judges' training in maritime law ought to be enough. Piracy-related trials should be conducted faster by special courts that enjoy maritime law experts.
9	Jurisdiction of Designated Courts	However, the Special Courts shall have jurisdiction to try piracy cases even when they are beyond India's territorial waters.	Indians' legal range broadens, but international legal clashes can happen.	Extrapolation: The Act extends jurisdiction beyond piracy cases, which is in effect outside India's waters and is contrary to international maritime law.	Provisions to cooperate with international legal institutions, such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), must be duly implemented to prevent jurisdictional conflicts and make prosecution easier.
10	Trial Procedures	Piracy trials shall be governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).	Ensures legal consistency at the expense of granting any specific provisions for difficult international piracy cases.	Standard Criminal Procedure: Section directs the trials for piracy under this shall be governed by CrPC, but it may not be suitable for the complexity of maritime law.	The Act must define specialized processes for the trials of piracy that accommodate maritime factors, such as evidence processes and witness protection or international cooperation.
11	Presumption of Guilt in Certain Cases	The court can presume guilt in the event of proof of weapons or piracy-related communication devices/navigation equipment belonging to that person.	Changes the evidential onus but with fair trial principles considerations.	Contravenes Right to Fair Trial: Seizure of some items (weapons, etc.) and Presumption of guilt, which may violate fair trial and due process.	The burden of proof should apply to the prosecution in any case and allow the defense to lay its evidence. The law could have used the evidence gathered by them as circumstantial evidence for the accused instead of a presumption of crime.
12	Bail Provisions	Bail is not available except under very rare circumstances for piracy suspects.	A preventive measure that could be challenged on constitutional grounds but act as a check against abuse of bail.	Restrictive bail provisions for piracy: Section restricts the bail to suspected piracy offenders, making a presence of minimum pre-release a turn-around time by fundamental rights.	The conditional bail should be granted by the Act on credible evidence and a strong nexus of the accused, thereby tackling the problem of pending trial due to arrest.
13	Application of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)	Except where the Act has specific provisions, the CrPC applies to piracy trials.	Clarity in procedure but does not consider maritime legal peculiarities.	Though the CrPC application can be helpful, it might not be so well-fitted for piracy cases, with subtleties such as ubiquitous jurisdiction & complex maritime evidence.	There can at least be a piracy-specific trial procedure code with rules about issues distinct to the offenses of sea piracy and outreach to international prospective jurors & multinational suspects.

	Extradition of Pirates	The extradition of pirates is conducted under India's extradition treaties or through other mutual relations.	Collaborates internationally but may rely on diplomatic relations.	Bilateral agreements or international cooperation through diplomatic relations: Extradition provisions are mostly dependent on and fast due to a slow trickle of international cooperation.	According to that act, extradition with the utmost cooperation and immediate execution by developing diplomatic channels for piracy-related extradition cases should be provided for at an early stage.
15	Protection for Actions Taken in Good Faith	Officers in good faith cannot be prosecuted under this law.	Essential for officer confidence, with mechanisms to prevent abuse.	Overly Broad Immunity: The general protection of law enforcement personnel can lead to abuse, such as excessive use of force or breach of authority while pursuing pirates.	Operational effectiveness: immunity is necessary, but it should be restricted to a standard set of grounds and have accountability mechanisms such as internal reviews or independent audits.

Significance

It is the first law in India that allows Indian authorities and courts to take care of piracy as well as pirate ships on high seas all over the globe. Below are a few such significances:

Maritime security: This act is one of the ingredients for guarding India's security and economic well-being.

Secure Navigation: India trades over two-thirds by sea, and more than 80% of the required hydrocarbon imports are seaborne, so securing these routes and lanes of communication is crucial.

Greater Jurisdiction: Previously only, the only coastal police in Mumbai got this writ of piracy, but now all the coastal police authorities have it, which is a great enabler for security forces, and not only the Navy.

Compliant with UNCLOS, 1982: This step taken by India in executing its international commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) benefitted to its maritime security, which is uniquely crystallized within this very definition of piracy and also furnished an universal international legal substrate for yielding acts of piracy.

Maritime Anti-Piracy Act 2022: Legal Analysis

The proposed Maritime Anti-Piracy Act of 2022 is indeed a welcoming endeavor to plug an enormous gap in the Indian legal basis for maritime security. In view that the Act comes with jurisdiction beyond territorial waters, it recognizes that piracy is a transnational crime and makes legal responsibility for the perpetrator indifferently to the nationality.

But implementing it on the ground is difficult (read as enforcement, diplomatic coordination, and procedural justice). Below are a few difficulties mentioned: 

(a) Legal and Policy Explanations

The Act remains consistent with international maritime law paramount, among which is UNCLOS, which eventually enforces the sovereignty of states to combat piracy. The Act, by making piracy an offense and providing for particularly sharp penalties, should help in legalizing civilian disputes related to the high seas and make the Indian Navy look like behaving responsible naval power. 

(b) Enforcement Issues

The Act is designed to enable police to take strong action to combat piracy but in reality, there are enforcement issues as mentioned below:

Evidence Hurdles: Obstructing is a huge problem on the high seas, accumulating and retaining admissible evidence for piracy incidents.

Fair Trial Standards (Prosecution): It is often difficult, from a legal and logistical viewpoint, to provide due process to pirates stranded on land, especially when the offender is a foreign national.

Conflict of Jurisdiction: This may lead to fights while prosecuting with other countries that have nationals involved in piracy incidents. 

(c) Human Rights Interest

The use of the death penalty for piracy causing death will attract human rights groups and international abolitionist bodies against the death penalty. This balanced approach would be, for example, the complete removal of longer terms without parole for the most serious crime. 

(d) Diplomatic and Strategic Assessment

For India to operationalize the Act, it will need to have a more robust foreign policy working with maritime neighbors and deeper engagement in multinational anti-piracy efforts.

The act provides a chance to get India recognized as a regional leader in promoting maritime security governance. 

Case Laws

Here are a few cases, to show how important anti-piracy legislation can go and also illustrate the judiciary in handling different sorts of offenses under the Indian constitution. While the recent Maritime Anti-Piracy Act of 2022 is new information, however, some cases before this Act have paved its introduction.

MV Alondra Rainbow Case (2000):

This was one such case of piracy, prosecuted, constituting the first generation in India. It was the hijacking of the Indian ship Alondra Rainbow off the coast of Indonesia by pirates. The Indian navy grabbed the ship off Goa and nabbed the pirates. The Court at Bombay has sentenced pirates who were convicted to serve seven years of rigorous imprisonment. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court reduced their terms a few years later, acknowledging India did not have any specific anti-piracy laws then. The Lexie 2012 case showed the importance of having a full legal structure for dealing with piracy, which consists of the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act 2022.

Enrica Lexie Case (2012):

Not an outright piracy case, Enrica Lexie was involved in the murder of two Indian fishermen by Italian marines onboard a tanker. It led to a row about India-Italy and implicitness over jurisdiction, international law, and the exercise of maritime or criminal jurisdiction. It was an incident because of the killing of civilians, but still, it exposed India's problem with trying crimes happening on the high seas. There is more clarity on such jurisdictional issues under the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act, 2022

Samho Jewelry Case (SC) (2011):

Indian naval forces fired at Somali pirates. None of them were arrested, and 13 hostages of the MV Samho Jewelry ship were released from the Lakshadweep coast. Pirates were transported to Mumbai for arraignment. There are no definite legal provisions to force prosecution, so procedural hindrances arise because of that. The incident was just another impetus for prompting the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act, of 2022, which would facilitate speedy trial against pirates from this incident.

Recommendations

Effective implementation of The Maritime Anti-Piracy Act, 2022 can be enhanced by the following recommendations:

Building Capacity: Continue the development of law enforcement/naval personnel in responding to piracy cases such as evidence collection and legal aspects.

Law Reforms: Proposal for an extradition treaty, mutual assistance treaties which ultimately help in smooth extradition and prosecution under international law

Human Rights Protections: Repeal consideration of the death penalty to be in concert with international human rights norms, and avoid a diplomatic crisis.

Technological Improvements: Spend on satellite monitoring, AI-threat detection systems, and maritime surveillance devices to prevent piracy from taking place.

Judicial and legal administration efficiency: Fast-track courts that deal with piracy should be created to have trials and sentencing done swiftly.

Regional Working: Increase cooperation with other international maritime security arrangements like the Combined Maritime Force (CMF) and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) for better coordination in the fight against pirates.

Conclusion

The Maritime Anti-Piracy Act of 2022 is a genuine attempt by India to curb maritime crime. While offering a well-rounded legal framework, its implementation is the most critical aspect, including that international cooperation as well as judicial efficiency must complement this legislation. Capacity building and enhancing interagency coordination or trial procedures to address evidentiary challenges To enhance its impact further, India should have a legislative approach to capacity building to meet evidential challenges during trials. With that, the Act can be a major enforcer in promoting peaceful seas and defending India’s maritime pathways. 

Although the Maritime Anti-Piracy Act of 2022 is a vital legal instrument for securing maritime and world trade routes, the security rationale of this will be based on the implementation of this long-term policy, judicial application, and regular policy changes to meet future piracy threats.

References

·       AdvocateKhoj.com, Maritime Anti-Piracy Act | Bare Acts | Law Library | AdvocateKhoj, Advocatekhoj.com (2022),

https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/bareacts/maritimeantipiracy/index.php?Title=Maritime%20Anti-Piracy%20Act (last visited Feb. 2, 2025).

·       India Code, https://www.indiacode.nic.in (last visited Feb. 2, 2025).

·       Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, https://www.mea.gov.in (last visited Feb. 2, 2025).

·       R. Bishop & W. Van Niekerk, Maritime Piracy: Legal Challenges and Legal Responses.

·       Supreme Court of India, Sci.gov.in (2019), https://www.sci.gov.in (last visited Feb. 2, 2025).

·       United Nations, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, United Nations (1982), https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf.