The Monte Confurco Case, Prompt Release

(Seychelles v. France)

Presented By Arjun Bajpai 11IP !!1"

Facts

The #$nte C$n%urc$ &as a Seychelle %la''ed and $&ned %ishin' vessel. The vessel &as ($arded (y the cre& $% French surveillance &hile the vessel &as in their )er'uelen Islands in the French S$uthern and Antarctic Territ$ries. The Islands are l$cated in France*s e+clusive ec$n$,ic -$ne. The vessel and captain $% the vessel entered the e+clusive ec$n$,ic -$ne &ith$ut per,issi$n $r declarin' the %ish $n ($ard. The French sei-ed the vessel and its ,aster declarin' the release $nly a%ter pay,ent $% a ($nd in the a,$unt $% . , /!!!,!!! French

Facts C$ntd.

Seychelles is clai,in' that the ($nd set (y France &as n$t reas$na(le and the #aster $% the ship sh$uld (e released &ith$ut a ($nd (ecause he sh$uld n$t (e su(ject t$ i,pris$n,ent. France clai,s the ($nd is reas$na(le %$r such 'rave cri,e and &ants Seychelles re1uest rejected.

Issues

Ad,issi(ility $% applicati$n under Article 232 $% 45C67S t$ the tri(unal. 8eas$na(leness $% the B$nd.

Ar'u,ents (y Seychelles

Seychelles re1uested the tri(unal t$ declare that France has C$ntravened &ith Article "9(/) (y n$t 'ivin' pr$per n$tice $% the arrest. Als$ re1uested the tri(unal t$ declere the 'urantee re1uired (y France as 4nreas$na(le "9(2). They als$ c$ntended that France did n$t c$,plied &ith the pr$visi$ns $% "9(9).

Acticle "9 $% 45C67S

(:n%$rce,ent $% la&s and re'ulati$ns $% the C$astal State)

2. Arrested vessels and their cre&s shall (e pr$,ptly released up$n the p$stin' $% reas$na(le ($nd $r $ther security. 9. C$astal State penalties %$r vi$lati$ns $% %isheries la&s and re'ulati$ns in the e+clusive ec$n$,ic -$ne ,ay n$t include i,pris$n,ent, in the a(sence $% a'ree,ents t$ the c$ntrary (y the States c$ncerned, $r any $ther %$r, $% c$rp$ral punish,ent. /. In cases $% arrest $r detenti$n $% %$rei'n vessels the c$astal State shall pr$,ptly n$ti%y the %la' State, thr$u'h appr$priate channels, $% the acti$n ta0en and $% any penalties su(se1uently i,p$sed.

France ;e%ence

France c$ntended that the ship had (een disc$vered in the ::< $% France, &ith$ut havin' 'ivin' n$ti%icati$n $% its presence even th$u'h the vessel &as e1uipped &ith Teleph$ne Facility Als$ c$ntended that the ship &as en'a'ed in ille'al %ishin' $% $vere+pl$ited specie called as =T$$th%ish=

;ecisi$n

Since ($th the parties &ere si'nat$ries t$ 45C67S and the applicati$n satis%ied the re1uire,ents $% secti$n 232(2) $% 45C67S and 8ules 11!, 111 $% the Tri(unal. Tri(unal rejected Seychelles ar'u,ent that pr$per n$tice &as n$t 'iven>"9(/)? and the detenti$n $% the #aster $% Ship &as a 'rave vi$lati$n $% his pers$nal ri'hts >"9(9)? The tri(unal als$ %$und the the ($nd i,p$sed (y the French c$urt &as n$t reas$na(le pursuant t$ article 232 and there%$re n$n c$,pliance &ith "9(2) &as &ell-%$unded (y a v$te $% 13@1.

8eas$na(leness $% B$nd
AThe following points to be relevant for determining the amount and nature of the bond or other financial security: AThe gravity of the alleged offences; AThe penalties imposed or imposable under the laws of the detaining State; and AThe value of the detained vessel and of the cargo seized;

The Tri(unal deter,ined, (y 1"@9, that the ($nd shall c$nsist $%@
(1) an a,$unt $% nine ,illi$n French %rancs (3,!!!,!!! FF) as the ,$netary e1uivalent $% the 1.B t$nnes $% t$$th%ish sei-ed (y the French auth$rities and (2) a ($nd in the a,$unt $% nine ,illi$n French %rancs (3,!!!,!!! FF).

Tri(unal held that the ($nd sh$uld (e pr$p$rti$nal t$ the vi$lati$n alle'ed and sh$uld n$t ta0e a punitive $r deterrent character. Th$u'h this is a very seri$us $%%ence in France, still they &ill have t$ strictly c$,ply &ith the principle $% Internati$nal la&.

Than0 C$u