The American P&I Club has issued an Alert advising of what it calls a ‘clampdown on ‘gun’ ships arriving at South African ports, and warns that failure to comply with strict local laws can result in the arrest of the ship’s master – as has already happened in several recent cases.
The American P&I Club has issued an Alert advising of what it calls a ‘clampdown on ‘gun’ ships arriving at South African ports, and warns that failure to comply with strict local laws can result in the arrest of the ship’s master – as has already happened in several recent cases.
The matter received some publicity in a weekend newspaper, following the confiscation of guns on board the general cargo ship AFRICAN LION and the products tanker JO KASHI – both regular callers at Durban or Richards Bay, which operate regularly in the Horn of Africa region.
In the instance of the African Lion, the ship had four ex-Royal Marine security officers already on board – there to provide security against pirates as the ship sailed north to Middle East ports.
Police found and confiscated four STIG firearms during their raid on the Jo Kashi.
Alan Reid, managing director of P&I Associates, told PORTS & SHIPS that there had been an about-face by the South African Police Services, which had initially agreed to allow some flexibility in the regulation that states that a 21 day period is required to obtain a permit allowing weapons to be on a vessel in a South African port (the outer anchorage is regarded as part of the port). This flexibility had been agreed locally with a senior police officer after representation was made.
Since then however, police headquarters in Pretoria have rescinded the flexibility agreement and are insisting that ships coming to a South African port must comply with the 21 day regulation, as set out in the Fire Arms Control Act 60 of 2000. The right of the Durban office to issue permits was revoked with immediate effect.
But this leaves a ships’ master with a dilemma – what does he do with weapons on board if he arrives well within the 21-day period? Reid painted the following scenario, which he said was representative of the challenges facing shipping. A ship sailing from the Mediterranean for East Africa would call at Djibouti where armed guards and properly licensed weapons would be taken on board for the passage past the Horn of Africa. On arrival in Mombasa the ship, according to the ever changing nature of ship fixtures, could be instructed to go on to Durban or Richards Bay to load or deliver cargo.
This section of the voyage will take five or so days, meaning that if an application was made while the ship is still in Mombasa it will arrive off Durban or Richards Bay well within the 21 day requirement for a permit, therefore breaking the law and facing arrest.
The alternative is to divert via Port Louis or Madagascar where the guns can be handed over to a legal authority, with the master in effect ‘signing off’ the weapons, leaving him able to head back to Durban, making for a voyage of far greater length and therefore cost.
If the ship is heading north, as with the case of the African Lion, the ship will have to go via Mauritius to collect weapons for the passage past the Horn of Africa.
It has been suggested that another alternative is to throw the weapons overboard once the ship had reached safe waters, but the weapons are licensed and listed on an international register in Djibouti and countries such as the UK and have to be accounted for without raising the spectre of illicit gun-running. Ironically, suspicion of gun- running was apparently one of the reasons proffered by the SAPS for them having seized the guns.
In defence of the police, illicit gun running is common in Africa and ships are one of the means of ‘running’ weapons into countries – see Plotting to sink Africa’s pirates below.
The whole process is now plagued by bureaucracy and a total lack of understanding of the situation, which is the reason behind the need to place armed guards on merchant vessels and the fact that the 21 day permit time is totally impractical with the ever changing nature of the fixtures, said Reid.
Nevertheless, the 21 day ruling stands and applies in all cases and the ball is now with SAASOA (South African Association of Ship Operators and Agents) who
have been charged with taking up the matter and reaching an understanding with the SAPS in Pretoria.
The latest application of the Fire Arms Control Act is reminiscent of the time when a P&O Nedlloyd container ship was detained in Port Elizabeth (shortly before the takeover by Maersk Line) because it was carrying containers of small arms and ammunition that were in transit to another country not in Africa. Because of ignorance the contents hadn’t been declared ahead of arrival and no permit was obtained – in the eyes of the law the weapons were now in South Africa illegally. The matter was eventually sorted out and the ship continued with its contested cargo (as did a second ship following with similar cargoes) but not before a senior representative of the line had to appear in court where he was found guilty and fined a sizeable amount.
In a related matter, it is being reported that an increasing number of South Africans are joining the queue to become armed guards on merchant ships, including from among those who are currently employed in some form or other in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq. See article below, which presents a number of alternate scenarios and perhaps helps to understand the SAPS point of view.
Discussion about this post