Does the United States Coast Guard, Navy, etc. have any authority to board or detain a foreign personal sailboat in international waters if no crime has been committed?
Legal Question
- Thread starter Raymus
- Start date
Probable Cause is the operative word....Being in international waters is a term to assign the rules of the road being used. One only needs to reference the sealift drug trade in the southern waters..
The US Coast Guard has the authority to board any vessel over which it has jurisdiction. The courts have long maintained this to mean any US Flagged vessel anywhere in the world.
Elsewhere, it gets a little fuzzy and the US has operating agreements with other countries that allow the CG to operate in their waters.The Bahamas is one example. The US has agreements with several countries to work on drug interdiction, Columbia is one example.
The boundary between international waters and protected waters is not a bright line. Vessels operating within the Economic Zone would be subject to CG jurisdiction. The EZ extends some 200 miles offshore.
Presumably, the CG has the right to stop any vessel anywhere to determine whether it is a US flagged vessel and to inspect the documentation and registration documents. Otherwise, how would they know if they have jurisdiction? Anyone can buy a US Flag and fly it. Likewise anyone can buy a flag of another country and fly it pretending to be from that country in an attempt to evade USCG jurisdiction.
If the CG wants to board, the best practice would be to cooperate, unless you're doing something you shouldn't be doing. But then again, CG boats are faster than a sailboat and their armaments are bigger.
Elsewhere, it gets a little fuzzy and the US has operating agreements with other countries that allow the CG to operate in their waters.The Bahamas is one example. The US has agreements with several countries to work on drug interdiction, Columbia is one example.
The boundary between international waters and protected waters is not a bright line. Vessels operating within the Economic Zone would be subject to CG jurisdiction. The EZ extends some 200 miles offshore.
Presumably, the CG has the right to stop any vessel anywhere to determine whether it is a US flagged vessel and to inspect the documentation and registration documents. Otherwise, how would they know if they have jurisdiction? Anyone can buy a US Flag and fly it. Likewise anyone can buy a flag of another country and fly it pretending to be from that country in an attempt to evade USCG jurisdiction.
If the CG wants to board, the best practice would be to cooperate, unless you're doing something you shouldn't be doing. But then again, CG boats are faster than a sailboat and their armaments are bigger.
The Coast Guard does not need probable cause either. It has long been established that the 4th amendment does not apply to vessels in waters that are accessible from international waters.
You wish it were that simple… the short answer is generally not. In certain circumstances it could be legally acceptable in the USA but could flare an international conflict such as the war of 1812!
Here is a good reference text: Limits
Obviously it is preferable to comply to all rules and regulations and see the USCG as friends.
Here is a good reference text: Limits
Obviously it is preferable to comply to all rules and regulations and see the USCG as friends.
Thanks for finding that. I took a brief read through the article. Perhaps most relevant to the OP's question is the discussion on pages 3-5. The gist of that discussion, the CG (and I would assume other nation's CGs) can board any vessel to verify the registration of the vessel and that unflagged vessels have few rights. See the section on "Exceptions to Exclusive Flag State Jurisdiction."
And as always the law is very nuanced even when we want simple clarity.
This is both clear and unambiguous. the USCG has historically had such authority, now more than ever for obvious reasons and is irrespective of any suspicion of a crime.
However, the vessel's master may deny boarding if nit is unsafe in his opinion.
Sailing out of the NE NW providence channel for Ft. Lauderdale, a cutter came up to the boat I was operating, demanding to lay alongside to inspect the boat.Sure it was a black schooner, under Panamanian registry, and would have seemed "sketchy" even to me to be honest. But it was blowing around 25 from the north and he'd destroy my boss's boat if a 70' cutter came alongside. I told him he could board me from the inflatable on deck, but he said it was too rough.
So, after giving him all pertinent information, I just carried on for Ft. Lauderdale. He kept screaming on 22a that I should stop and he wanted to board me immediately, and kept trying to jockeying his boat to do so. After a few near collisions I switched to 16 and started to send a Mayday. "Mayday, mayday, mayday, I am being boarded by a big white boat with an orange stripe and hull number XX", every 15 minutes. He was so furious that I guessed his bridge crew were doing everything in their power not to laugh at him. He ordered me back to 22a over and over again, but I just ignored him.
He fell back a couple of hundred yards and followed me to the breakwater, where half a dozen USCG boats escorted me to a slip at Pier 66. As soon as the last line was secure, they swarmed aboard like ants on honey. The funniest part was that we had not only run out of any illegal substances we might have had aboard months before, but we didn't have one liquor bottle, beer or even a cigarette, aboard.
The powers that be agreed with me that a boarding in those conditions (I mean really, he wouldn't even launch his inflatable!) would have been extremely dangerous. I didn't even get a lecture, never mind a ticket.
Sailing out of the NE NW providence channel for Ft. Lauderdale, a cutter came up to the boat I was operating, demanding to lay alongside to inspect the boat.Sure it was a black schooner, under Panamanian registry, and would have seemed "sketchy" even to me to be honest. But it was blowing around 25 from the north and he'd destroy my boss's boat if a 70' cutter came alongside. I told him he could board me from the inflatable on deck, but he said it was too rough.
So, after giving him all pertinent information, I just carried on for Ft. Lauderdale. He kept screaming on 22a that I should stop and he wanted to board me immediately, and kept trying to jockeying his boat to do so. After a few near collisions I switched to 16 and started to send a Mayday. "Mayday, mayday, mayday, I am being boarded by a big white boat with an orange stripe and hull number XX", every 15 minutes. He was so furious that I guessed his bridge crew were doing everything in their power not to laugh at him. He ordered me back to 22a over and over again, but I just ignored him.
He fell back a couple of hundred yards and followed me to the breakwater, where half a dozen USCG boats escorted me to a slip at Pier 66. As soon as the last line was secure, they swarmed aboard like ants on honey. The funniest part was that we had not only run out of any illegal substances we might have had aboard months before, but we didn't have one liquor bottle, beer or even a cigarette, aboard.
The powers that be agreed with me that a boarding in those conditions (I mean really, he wouldn't even launch his inflatable!) would have been extremely dangerous. I didn't even get a lecture, never mind a ticket.
Read the document posted by @Caboteur, paying particular attention to the section beginning on page 4 entitled "Exceptions to Exclusive Flag State Jurisdiction." Which essentially says, any vessel anywhere can be stopped by the a CG (any country's that is a signatory to a couple of treaties) and demand to see the boat's papers. If they are not in order the vessel can be boarded.
jssailem
SBO Weather and Forecasting Forum Jim & John
- Oct 22, 2014
- 22,829
Not a lawyer, but I can read...
The Coast Guard's enforcement of applicable U.S. law on the high seas is governed by both
U.S. law and international law.
When a gorilla with weapons pulls up along side and says they intend to board your vessel you likely will want to comply and then complain in court.
The Coast Guard's enforcement of applicable U.S. law on the high seas is governed by both
U.S. law and international law.
- 14 U.S.C. 2: "The Coast Guard shall enforce or assist in the enforcement of all applicable federal laws on, under, or over the high seas and water subject to the jurisdiction of the UnitedStates...."
- 14 U.S.C. 89(a) authorizes the Coast Guard to "make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon the high seas and waters over which the U.S. has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, and suppression of violations of laws of the United States."
- Under customary international law, the 1958 High Seas Convention (HSC) (ratified by the United States)
- The flag state of a vessel has the exclusive right to exercise legislative and enforcement jurisdiction over its vessels on the high seas.
- U.S. Supreme Court characterized the role of the flag state saying, "Each state under international law may determine for itself the conditions on which it will grant its nationality to a merchant ship, thereby accepting responsibility for it and acquiring authority over it."
- In cases in which a vessel is without nationality (stateless), there is a vacuum created concerning jurisdiction over actions taken by, or which occur upon, that vessel. Customary international law addresses the vacuum by dictating that any state may exert its jurisdiction over stateless vessels.
When a gorilla with weapons pulls up along side and says they intend to board your vessel you likely will want to comply and then complain in court.
I found it interesting that a person new to the forum asked about boarding by the Coast Guard in national and international waters vs. asking about gear, which boat to buy, etc
Absolutely, the US Coast Guard and other similar law enforcement organizations are empowered to enforce all sorts of international laws and treaties at home, abroad and all spaces in between.
If one is not up to anything nefarious then it would seem logical to welcome their presence for the security they would offer by their mere presence.
If one is not up to anything nefarious then it would seem logical to welcome their presence for the security they would offer by their mere presence.
.
Thank you for asking that question. I'm sure many have wondered the same thing. I am a "newbi" to these types of sites but that does not mean I am new to sailing. It was a debate, and then a $100 bet I had with a sailing friend from France. His Swedish friend was boarded 310 miles off the coast of Nova Scotia, well into International waters by the U.S. Coast Guard. There was no probable cause, nothing was found to be in violation of any law and no crimes were committed. Yes, as they say, if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear. However, they felt violated and intimidated and considered filing a complaint, but decided to just let it go. With certain countries this may have caused an an international incident. We have slowly surrendered our sovereign rights over to an increasingly "benevolent", (tyrannical) government, who assures us these things are for our best. Remember the frog in the pot analogy: When the heat is turned up very, very slowly we don't know we are boilinging to death until it's too late. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin It's not a matter of having something to hide or not, it's a matter of standing up for what rights we have left, before we don't have any at all. Even standing up for the "little things" matters. Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. The key is to keep people imprisoned but make them believe they are free.
Thanks to all who have taken the time to read my post. May the sun be in your face and the wind at your back.
Cliches aside, some of us served in the USCG and would take exception that boarding inspections are an abuse of power or that you somehow lost some right you think you ever had.
The right of boarding ships on the high seas has a long history and is now governed by international treaties. There are many who use the high seas for nefarious purposes, such smuggling people, smuggling drugs and other contraband, and piracy. The international community has banded together to protect shipping and allowing any boat on the high seas to be stopped and questioned is part of that protection.
Dave has provided a concise historical background.
My guess is that most of would like to believe that we are, when boating, considered innocent until proven guilty, just like in our land homes, and that probable cause should also be required for search of our vehicles. Not always true, but still....
Afloat, it's as though "exigent circumstances" are in force 100% of the time, and we are presumed guilty until proven or declared innocent.
(I try not to be completely naive about this, as I worked for many years in offices with black friends that were subject to local policing, where their vehicle would be regularly pulled over merely for "driving while black."
So even on land we not totally safe from unreasonable/unlawful search and possible seizure.)
Not a perfect world, but it is what it is.
Close to going off the rails here.Dave has provided a concise historical background.
My guess is that most of would like to believe that we are, when boating, considered innocent until proven guilty, just like in our land homes, and that probable cause should also be required for search of our vehicles. Not always true, but still....
Afloat, it's as though "exigent circumstances" are in force 100% of the time, and we are presumed guilty until proven or declared innocent.
(I try not to be completely naive about this, as I worked for many years in offices with black friends that were subject to local policing, where their vehicle would be regularly pulled over merely for "driving while black."
So even on land we not totally safe from unreasonable/unlawful search and possible seizure.)
Not a perfect world, but it is what it is.
I (geriatric white male) was stopped while driving because a similar car was reported stolen. I was appreciative of law enforcement for being prospective in their diligence. Hardly an “unreasonable or unlawful search. My experience with the car is the metaphor which more appropriately applies here.
now, back to our regular programming.