Re Pulos

• Jurisdiction: Italia
• Date: 17 Dicembre 1976
• Court: Regional Tribunal (Italy)

Italy, Tribunal of Naples.

Re Pulos and Others

Sea High seas Jurisdiction Hot pursuit Smuggling Principle of freedom of the high seas Derogations under customary international law Protection of interests of coastal State Geneva Convention on the High Seas, 1958, Articles 2 and 23 Whether more restrictive than customary law right of hot pursuit Foreign ship outside territorial waters Suspected of working with smaller craft in smuggling Arrest of smaller vessel within territorial waters Whether permitting hot pursuit of larger ship on high seas

Jurisdiction Territorial Territorial waters Hot pursuit Smuggling The law of Italy

Summary: The facts:The Greek vessel Olimpios Hermes was surprised by the Italian coastguard's customs police (Guardia di Finanza) on 29 November 1976, off the coast of the island of Ischia on the high seas, surrounded by a fleet of some twenty motor boats whilst other boats were waiting further away. One of the boats, having taken on board a quantity of cartons of cigarettes from the Greek vessel, was pursued and captured by the Guardia di Finanza inside Italian territorial waters. Coastguard vessels then tried by visual and auditory signals to stop the Greek vessel, which was slowly moving off from its position outside territorial waters. When it appeared that their attempts were fruitless, they boarded the vessel, seized the remainder of its cargo of cigarettes and arrested the persons on board, charging them with smuggling. The defendants claimed that the arrest and seizure were unlawful since the vessel was foreign and had been on the high seas at the relevant time.

Held:The arrest and seizure were lawful under international law.

(1) The principle of the freedom of the high seas was subject to restrictions and derogations based on customary international law and the Geneva Convention on the High Seas, 1958. Two such restrictions came into operation in the present case.

(2) First, as provided for in Article 2 of the Convention, the freedom of the high seas had to be exercised by every State with reasonable regard to the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas. Since the Greek vessel had used the high seas for the purpose of injuring the financial interests of the coastal State, by positioning itself close to the boundary of the territorial sea of that State with a view to acting in concert with other vessels to violate customs legislation, the seizure was lawful.

(3) A second limitation on the freedom of the seas was the right of hot pursuit, whereby the coastal State could pursue and seize on the high seas foreign civil vessels guilty of infringing its legislation in internal or territorial waters. The right of hot pursuit was provided for in Article 23 of the Geneva Convention and also under customary international law. Whereas Article 23 laid down five conditions for the arrest of vessels on the high seas, customary international law was less specific in limiting the right of hot pursuit. This indicated that States were tending to return to a broad conception of the right in order to provide better protection of their national interests which were increasingly threatened by highly organized criminal groups.

(4) In the present case, all the conditions for hot pursuit laid down in Article 23 of the Convention were fulfilled. Although the Greek vessel had not entered Italian territorial waters it had nevertheless operated as a team with other boats for the common purpose of transhipping and ferrying to the shore a cargo of cigarettes, sold in advance in Italy, in breach of Italian customs legislation. Furthermore one of the boats in question, which was Italian, whilst acting in concert with the Greek mother ship had actually been pursued and seized in Italian...