The debate on private guards opens in France. European shipowners are against
(BRUSSELS2) Shipowners still seem doubtful about the solution of armed private guards to fight against piracy. They have just published a "position paper" which aims to draw governments' attention to their responsibility in this area. " Protecting ships against piracy - regardless of their flag or the nationality of the crew - is a clear and legitimate responsibility of governments under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea explains the President of the European Chamber of Shipowners (ESC), Jean-Louis Cambon. The House "therefore urges Governments everywhere to assume their responsibilities in the application of the Convention, the protection of their flags, to co-operate and thus fully assist in the protection of all merchant ships in their territorial waters ". And shipowners to recall, firmly, their traditional position on private armed guards. " There is growing support within the maritime industry and some governments to arm ship crews themselves or employ private armed guards (NB: this is now part of the Best Practices drafted by the maritime community). It's understandable. But that's not our answer. This can lead to further liability issues, and increase the level of hacker violence. Crew safety is paramount »
Break the taboo
This position comes at a time when several French deputies are in favor of a change of position on the question of private military companies, particularly in terms of the fight against piracy, following the opinion of the Armateurs de France. In a report submitted on February 14 to the Commission for Defense and the Armed Forces of the National Assembly, Christian Ménard and Jean-Claude Viollet break what they call " A taboo " advocating “the opening, in France, of security and defense service companies (ESSD)”. The two parliamentarians, from two opposing political groups (the first is UMP from Finistère, the second from the PS of Charente), agree completely on the need to create French companies intended to ensure the security, particularly abroad, of our major industrial groups, their staff. " We must be aware that our country, because of the multiplicity of theaters of operations, must have recourse to this type of company. The Anglo-Saxons, South Africans, Israelis, among others, understood this very well by creating such entities... “says Christian Ménard, well known to this blog since he wrote two reports on maritime piracy. This is a question of safety but also of industrial interest. " The Shipowners of France, the vast majority of the military (who see the possibility of a second career), the industrialists are moving in the direction of such an opening. It is now up to our country to experiment (why not at the level of maritime piracy?), to legislate and, of course, to label such companies ».
NB: one can notice the silence on the question of the European Union. We are here in an economic domain. And there would be an interest in having a collective community framework, to avoid divergent legislation. An optional framework that takes into account the position of countries that wish to authorize or not these companies. Otherwise there is a risk that sooner or later there will be a telescoping effect between the various national legislations and the Community principles of freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services.
