Prosecuting Piracy at the High Seas: the Experience of Malaysia

Abstract

The development of the law on piracy under two major international treaties; the Geneva Convention, 1958 and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 has witnessed great acceptance and application of the law with many coastal states have crafted specific anti-piracy law as a manifestation of their commitments to the international treaties. However, up until today, Malaysia has yet to come out with a single and unified statute against piracy despite being a member to both treaties. The law is scattered in a different set of documents and carried out by various agencies that are responsible to each respective law. It is argued that given this is the position in Malaysia, the prosecution of piracy would be a critical problem for the law enforcement. In this paper, we address this concern by looking at both Malaysian legal framework as well as the experience of the country against international piracy, particularly the case of Bunga Laurel. The findings suggest that there are more than twenty Acts that might be used against piracy. As a sovereign state under the international law, Malaysia also has the right to resort to principles of international law for the apprehension and prosecution of high sea pirates. To this effect, the case of Bunga Laurel has really manifested the successful application of Malaysian law by the High Court of Malaya against international piracy. The paper concludes that the absence of a single anti-piracy law is not necessarily an obstacle, but instead an advantage with great choice of law available for the prosecution in this country.