1 Attachment(s)
The Naval Services have laws ?
Actually, they do - 2007 Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations.pdf
Quote:
from Bill
Is there a law of the sea that actually permits killing pirates on the spot? Is there a law that prohibits it?
Yes, if they resist or flee (Tennessee v Garner probably would allow deadly force); but usually it's Rule of Law (international law enforcement) - see snip attached:
Quote:
3.5.3 Use of Naval Forces to Repress Piracy
Only warships, military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on governmental service and authorized to that effect, may seize a pirate ship or aircraft.
3.5.3.1 Seizure of Pirate Vessels and Aircraft
A pirate vessel or aircraft encountered in or over U.S. or international waters may be seized and detained by any of the U.S. vessels or aircraft listed in paragraph 3.5.3. The pirate vessel or aircraft, and all persons on board, should be taken, sent, or directed to the nearest U.S. port or airfield and delivered to U.S. law enforcement authorities for disposition according to U.S. law. Alternatively, higher authority may arrange with another nation to accept and try the pirates and dispose of the pirate vessel or aircraft, since every nation has jurisdiction under international law over any act of piracy.
Now, you will undoubtedly find some historical evidence of pirates being hanged on the spot.
However, the SROEs default to self-defense and seizure:
Quote:
(5) Piracy. US warships and aircraft have an obligation to repress piracy on or over international waters directed against any vessel, or aircraft, whether US or foreign flagged and are authorized to employ all means necessary to repress piratical acts. For ships and aircraft repressing an act of piracy, the right and obligation of self defense extends to persons, vessels, or aircraft assisted. If a pirate vessel or aircraft fleeing from pursuit proceeds into the territorial sea, archipelagic waters, or superjacent airspace of another country, every effort should be made to obtain the consent of the coastal state prior to continuation of the pursuit.
So, that's present legal reality for US ships.
---------------------------
This is hypothetical.
If the conflict with the pirates were an "armed conflict" (Declaration of War or AUMF), the members of the targeted pirate group could be designated as a "hostile force" (from SROEs):
Quote:
5. ... i. Hostile Force. Any civilian, paramilitary, or military force or terrorist(s), with or without national designation, that has committed a hostile act, exhibited hostile intent, or has been declared hostile by appropriate US authority.
6. Declaring Forces Hostile. Once a force is declared hostile by appropriate authority, US units need not observe a hostile act or a demonstration of hostile intent before engaging that force. The responsibility for exercising the right and obligation of national self defense and as necessary declaring a force hostile is a matter of the utmost importance. All available intelligence, the status of international relationships, the requirements of international law, an appreciation of the political situation, and the potential consequences for the United States must be carefully weighed. The exercise of the right and obligation of national self-defense by competent authority is separate from and in no way limits the commander’s right and obligation to exercise unit self-defense. The authority to declare a force hostile is limited as amplified in Appendix A of this Enclosure.
Note that, even under the Laws of War, summary executions (e.g., in a field commander's discretion) have been barred since WWI - though trial by military tribunal is still theoretically possible.
Regards
Mike