Asphalt Venture - bad news

Terrible, keeping the Indian seafarers back.

Here's the report from EcoTerra on the episode:-

BOTCHED PIRATE SHIP RELEASE SEES INDIAN HOSTAGES LEFT BEHIND IN SOMALIA (ecop-marine)
Emirati-owned MSV ASPHALT VENTURE steams off with only half the crewWhat serious analysts predicted since long in the Somali piracy circus are cases where the amateur negotiators and deliverers, who are often friends of friends in the insurance industry, create more difficulties than they solve with ill-conceived ransom drops and not at all planned, insecure release operations.
After a drop of a compared to other recent releases much smaller amount of a ransom today to the pirate gang on the vessel, the sea-shifta left but took with them seven hostages of Indian nationality.
Immediately followed by the usual news-hounds from the often in these very sensitive situations too fast media, different versions concerning the why the Somalis hold the seven Indians were circulated:

"The ship has just sailed away but we have taken some of its Indian crew back because the Indian government is currently holding our men. We need the Indian government to free our men so that we can release their citizens." a wire service reported an alleged pirate calling himself Ahmed as saying. And another wire spread: "We decided to keep the Indian because India is holding our colleagues," the [alleged] pirate, Hassan Farah, said. "We released the other crew members who sailed away from our coast. We will keep these Indians until the Indians release our colleagues."

These news-clips were widely reprinted, though they might hold little substance. But as a matter of fact there are over 120 Somalis nabbed during Indian anti-piracy campaigns in Indian jails and the Somalis have been angry since many weeks and also mistreated especially Indian seamen on other hostage ships due to this situation.
However, we want in the moment therefore only report that - according to our own monitors - the seven seamen are alive and are held around 30km outside of Harardheere and that in our opinion still all options are possible. The traditional Xeer system of legal understanding, widely accepted by the traditional population of Somalia, allows for different solutions to achieve justice in their understanding - some options, however, can be drastic.
Immediately when the pirate gang made for the land, the captain of MV ASPHALT VENTURE started the engines and steamed together with his remaining seven Indian crew off the Central Somali coast near Ceel Gaan, leaving the other seven seafarers to their unsecure fate at the hands of the Somalis.
But meanwhile also the vessel run into trouble, though no more pirates are on board, because the ship reportedly encountered problems and could not proceed in her voyage. Fuel or mechanical problems could be the cause.
If ransom couriers get arrested and briefly jailed like recently in Djibouti, where they then first had to buy themselves free with a hefty handshake and part of their own loot in the exercise, such is just a story for the round-tables of the security and risk-management companies but if a release operation is so shoddily planned and executed like it is obvious in this case, the families are advised to also seek legal redress from those responsible for such blunder.
BACKGROUND: (ecoterra)
MT ASPHALT VENTURE : Seized September 28, 2010. The Panama-flagged asphalt tanker MT ASPHALT VENTURE (IMO 8875798) was captured on her way from Mombasa - where the vessel left at noon on 27. September, southbound to Durban, at 20h06 UTC = 23h06 local time in position 07 09 S 40 59 E. The vessel was sailing in ballast and a second alarm was received at 00h58 UTC = 03h58 LT. The ship with its 15 all Indian crew was then observed to have turned around and is at present commandeered northwards to Somalia. EU NAVFOR confirmed the case only in the late afternoon of 29. September. Information from the ground says a pirate group from Brawa had captured the vessel and at first it was reported that the vessel was heading towards Harardheere at the Central Somali Indian Ocean coast, while the tanker had first contact at the Somali coast near Hobyo and was then commandeered further north. The vessel is managed by ISM manager OMCI SHIPMANAGEMENT PVT LTD from Mumbai and owned by BITUMEN INVEST AS from Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, who uses INTER GLOBAL SHIPPING LTD from Sharjah, United Arab Emirates as ship-handler. The Government of India and other authorities are informed. Concerning the condition of the crew so far no casualties or injuries are reported, but the vessel seems to have had an engine problem. Negotiations had commenced but have so far not been reaching anywhere. Vessel and crew were held off Kulub at the North-Eastern Indian Ocean coast of Somalia, then had been transferred southwards to Ceel Gaan in the Harardheere area at the Central Somali Indian Ocean coast with negotiations more stuck than smooth; and when the crew reportedly had no more food, clean water and diesel a hasty and ill-planned release against a ransom drop was enacted on 15. April 2011. While the vessel got away at least for some distance until it developed problems and couldn't continue, seven Indian crew were left behind on the beach, who continue to be held as hostages.

What really happened to the BELUGA NOMINATION in Somalia?

Every piracy and hijacking episode has its own human toll, which is seldom ever revealed, but the episode involving the BELUGA NOMINATION stands out for a variety of reasons. Of late, violence against seafarers seems to have grown from bad to worse, and those on board BELUGA NOMINATION's experienced some of the worst leading to multiple deaths and injuries.

BELUGA, a German company, has been in financial trouble for quite some time now. About 50 of its 140-odd vessels are currently impounded or in trouble worldwide for fiduciary reasons, and more are re-possesed or trade under other fundamentals Even the BELUGA NOMINATION, by the time it was released, had been renamed NOMINATION.

Seized on 22jan2011, she was on a voyage from Italy via Malta to South Korea via Seychelles, carrying cargo listed as "steel" but actually much else - including structurals, boats and yachts. This company is known to be in the business of delivering arms globally, also, and till today it has not been revealed what cargo she was actually carrying.

The crew were able to withstand the attack for 49 hours in the citadel, and even managed to steer and control the vessel while inside. However, despite the presence of naval forces nearby, no action was taken to remove the pirates - who finally broke into the citadel using blow-torches and gas-operated cutting tools.

Initially, the vessel was part of the convoy leaving the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, and despite reports of pirates circling the convoy looking for stragglers, the vessel chose to break away from the convoy in full sight of the pirates, who then followed her. With a slow speed, loaded down to her marks with deck cargo visible, and a 2 metre freeboard as a heavy-lift carrier small general cargo ship, she was a sitting duck target - and other ships in the convoy wondered.

In the initial turmoil due to the citadel being breached, two seafarers managed to escape - the Ukranian 2nd Officer launched the lifeboat and a Filipino cook jumped into the water to get into the boat, and were rescued by the Danish warship HDMS ESBERN SNARE, which was suddenly on-scene.Two more seafarers who jumped into the water went missing, and a pirate was killed in the fighting that followed, after which yet another seafarer was killed in retribution.

It was after this that the naval ships nearby, Danish and Seychelles Coast Guard, also fired on the engine room to disable the ship. Why they did not do this before the citadel was breached is yet unknown, some attribute it to lack of information on the explosive nature of the cargo as well as communication with the Master of the ship, which as mentioned before was carrying some probably undeclared cargo in the holds.

After this, the pirates brough the Long Range Mother Ship, the previously pirated gas tanker YORK, and used her engine crew to work and repair the BELUGA NOMINATION, after which both sailed back to the Somali coast.

It was also reported that the Chief Engineer of the BELUGA NOMINATION died under terrible circumstances.

As this blog is written, the NOMINATION (as she is now called) is now released and in safe waters, the status of cargo onboard as well as seafarers is not reliably known, and interim since the owners, managers and operators have all changed, the only remaining thread is with the insurance company - Danish company SKULD.

+++

The BELUGA NOMINATION episode, if and when the truth about the remaining 6 or 7 seafarers from the original 12 or 14 is revealed, brings out many important issues:-

# Management companies are still not able to do much, despite being the link, for seafarers. The seafarers onboard this ship were covered under an ITF agreement between Marlowe Navigation and Vereinte Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft, both of whom were not able to do much.

# The situation with number of ships currently seized and seafarers being held captive is grossly under-stated. According to one EU-NAVFOR report, the actual number of ships and seafarers is double that of official figures - there are many piracy incidents which are simply not revealed.

# The old method of citadels built around steering gears and after peak tanks will not work, and citadels will have to be built to withstand at least 7 days of effort, to permit naval ships to take action, especially if it involves coordination with multiple entities representing owners, charterers, flag state, cargo receivers, ITF, insurers and other interests.

# Seafarers own insurance terms and conditions for working in piracy areas need to be defined more clearly, in advance, and next of kin taken into confidence at all times.

+++

There is much that is still unknown about what actually happened with the crew on the BELUGA NOMINATION. And this was one of the so-called "best of breed" European owners, with European officers and Philipino crew, all covered by a variety of agreements. And half of them now dead.

+++

Families and friends of seafarers who are stuck due to piracy in Somalia or elsewhere.

Dear family members and friends of seafarers who are currently stuck onboard ships hijacked or pirated. Our hearts go out to you. And we understand your problems like only other seafarers can.

Kindly contact the undersigned at any time by email in case you need any help or information or simply wish to seek advice or propagate your case with other seafarer groups.

Thank you.

Veeresh Malik

11 dec 2010, latest on piracy in the Indian Ocean

It is now a rampage, all over the Indian Ocean, with multiple "mother ships" being used by the pirates.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_navy-ship-rescues-thai-national-thrown-overboard-by-pirates_1477984

A Thai crew member thrown into the sea by pirates after hijacking a cargo vessel has been rescued by an Indian warship about 350 nautical miles off Minicoy Island in the Lakshadweep Island chain.
The Thai national's vessel, Prantalay 12, was hijacked a couple of months ago and being used as a mother ship by Somali pirates to launch attacks on other merchant vessels when he was thrown over board by the sea brigands, a navy spokesperson said here today.

India's INS Krishna, which was patrolling in the area noticed Prantalay 12 and was following it when the Thai sailor was thrown out into the sea by the brigands, he said, adding the Thai man was brought to Kochi for further formalities.

"On the evening of December 4, INS Krishna rescued the Thai national while on patrol about 350 nautical miles from Minicoy Island. On sighting INS Krishna, the trawler started heading Westwards at maximum speed away from the islands. One of the Thai nationals held hostage on board was seen to be pushed into the sea," he said.

The pirates later sailed the trawler at high speeds towards the Somali coast.

Prantalay 12 is the second suspected mother vessel that was cleared from the Eastern Arabian Sea. The navy had deployed a multi-ship force in November about 300-400 nautical miles off India's west coast to clear the area of the pirates.

During the course of the security sweep in the area, the navy ship chased another merchant tanker MT Polar, being used as a mother ship by pirates, away from the region.

"Navy and Coast Guard ships and aircraft continue to patrol the areas of reported pirate attacks in an effort to ensure safety of the sea lanes of communication," the navy spokesperson said, reiterating the requirement for all merchant vessels to adopt best management practices, as prescribed by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) as vital to ensuring the safety of shipping from piracy.
However, a Bangladeshi merchant vessel was hijacked by Somali pirates about 80 nautical miles off Minicoy Island and about 320 nautical miles of Indian west coast in international waters, but within Indian Exclusive Economic Zone.

The vessel, identified as MV Jahan Moni, had raised an alarm that it was being chased by a pirate-operated skiff and sought help, but by the time the Indian Navy and Coast Guard ships that were in the vicinity could respond, the merchant vessel was hijacked, Defence Ministry sources said.

The attack on MV Jahan Moni came on Sunday and the 26-member crew were captured by the pirates, who took the vessel back to Somali coast, the sources said.

The vessel was reportedly carrying 41,000 tonnes of nickel on board and it is believed that the pirates would use both the merchandise and the crew of the cargo ship to demand a ransom, they said.
The attack took place at the 'eight-degree channel' between Minicoy Island and Maldives, which witnesses a traffic of about 40 cargo ships on an average every day.

Really, is your Merchant Ship insured against piracy? How do you know?

So, dear Seafarer. Shipowner, Shipmanager, regulatory Authority, Fleet Personnel Manager, Union Leader, family members and everybody else interested in this subject of seafarers going off to dangerous waters . . .  would you please like to come out with cogent statements involving not just pleasantly couched words, but hard facts and numbers,  what really the insurance protection for the man on the ship is in case of piracy or hijack? Modern day piracy, of which just about 40% takes place in the Arabian Sea waters, is now a global phenomenon. Somalia gets a lot more attention because it appears to have become a hub lately, and is closer to India, but the rest of the world is not far behind, and the "business" of hijacking ships seems to be growing. Just like other streams of crime, for example prostitution, narcotics, arms trade - this too now seems to be settling into a pattern and a system.

That's as far as the relevance to the fact that this is now another business, and all business is about numbers, so what are the numbers, and where do the numbers go? What does it mean when somebody tells somebody else that "insurance for piracy" exists on such-and-such ship?

To start with, the piracy numbers include:-

# Investment versus returns, and a whole flotilla of numbers and words persons, and also some mercenaries, to keep the whole business well-greased. Imagine, can a transaction of almost 10 million dollars (9.8 million was the reported figure) plus costs involved in enabling this payment for releasing the supertanker SAMHO DREAM (say, another 5 million dollars) have been able to move across the globe without the direct participation of a whole lot of number crunchers  and shysters all over the world, especially in the "developed' world? So, modern-day piracy is not about to simply go away, for any reason.(Source - bankers unwilling to be identified in Europe and UAE.)

#The definitions of piracy and hijacking also appear to vary worldwide, and this in turn impacts the question of whether a vessel is a total loss or not, after the incident, whether hijack or piracy. Either way, in some countries, the insured shipowner/operator has not been "ir-retrievably deprived" of the vessel, so insurance claims for piracy or hijack, even interim, can not be paid out. Never mind what happens on the ship. In addition, it is the duty of the shipowner and his Master/crew to prove that they made all attempts to mitigate losses, and whether this includes the ransom payment or not is an open issue. So, a Master and his crew, who have not been paid, not received decent food, have been under capture, whose families may be starving - they still have to prove that all attempts were made to "mitigate" losses.

# In the UAE, it is even more complex, since they demand a "special provision" for piracy. The difference between "war risk" and "piracy" is there, not sublime, but complicated. However, one can not substitute the other, so a special cover in advance will be needed. At what point does piracy become an "act of war", given the current pronouncements of the attackers, claiming that they are working for their countries? No clear answers here, either - and carrying armed guards on board through somebody else's territorial waters, does that impact right of innocent passage? What does the Master of a ship have to say, if armed guards are on his ship, and the ship is then considered "hostile" - where do the crew stand as far as insurance goes, then?

# So while "piracy insurance" may have been taken by a shipowner/operator, please remember that "even though piracy is an insured peril, the onus to prove the act of piracy for successful recovery remains with the assured, in particular to establish that the act occurred was piracy and not terrorism, i.e. that the persons committing the act did so exclusively for their own material benefit, rather than pursuing a political, ideological or religious scope."

(Fichte & Co. http://www.fichtelegal.com/en/news_article.php?news_id=71)

Many of the latest episodes of piracy are defining their activities stikingly close to this.

# There is an estimate, provided by the Professional  General Insurance Research Organisation (GIRO) that each piracy attack on a merchant ship costs around 9 million dollars, and from another un-named source, that it is eventually between 10 and 15 million dollars, ransom and all costs. This is just a ballpark estimate, and rising lately. Working backwards from here, the average cost per merchant ship transiting the Suez Canal and going through the Gulf of Aden works out to between 70 and 110 thousand dollars, another rough estimate, and rising. Higher on ships carrying higher value cargoes, ofcourse, so assume a 10000 teu ship is paying about 300,000 dollars per trip each way - that's 30 dollars per teu extra costs. But what are the owners, cargo interests and seafarers getting out of this, incase of attack? That's not very clear.

# The number of seafarers kidnapped in piracy/hijack incidents as per the London-based International Chamber of Commerce’s Commercial Crimes Services was 867 in 2009, and 790 so far this year. There are some 'carry-forwards' who have been kidnapped in the previous year/years, and some simply 'missing'. However, this does not in any way provide any information on the disruption to seafarers even way outside in the Arabian Sea, in terms of mental tension and actual attacks.

# Allianz Global Corporate & Strategy, a leading insurer of ships and cargo, says that in most cases, piracy is covered under "normal" hull and insurance cover, even for ships not trading in piracy prone areas. The efficacy of this "normal" cover when a piracy or hijack takes place is very much under debate and till then, may well be slightly ineffective at best. So the solution would be to take additional cover. However, truth is that many owners or operators or charterers simply do not take additional cover when going through these areas - because special piracy covers are not easily available that offer special, flexible and tailor made cover for such ships.

# Here is a map of the piracy prone areas worldwide:-

http://www.aida.org.uk/AIDAEurop/AIDAStellaspaper.pdf

It is clear that marine insurance is the oldest form of insurance worldwide. War risk and piracy insurance have been linked for a long time. However, war risk insurance, and also piracy, can be unilaterally cancelled by the insurer at 48 hours notice. What does the seafarer onboard know about this, is the regulator able to provide any form of guarantees here?

It is in your interest as a seafarer to actively seek out the full details of the insurance cover taken for piracy, and to see that it is kept valid throughout your tenure - which obviously you can not do. But certainly the regulators, DG Shipping, can frame some rules urgently in this context?

Or, as is often the case, keep sailing "Ram Bharose".

MLC 2010 and the seafarer onboard a ship - some new bits . . .

Many shipowners and seafarers do not realise it as yet, but the Maritime Labour Convention 2010 (MLC 2010) which is going to come into force next year (2011), will be implemented by Port State Control. So it does not matter if your Flag State has ratified or signed on to the convention or not - if the Port State has signed on, then compliance by owners, operators, Master and seafarers will be essential.

States that have already ratified the MLC 2010 include Panama, Canada, Bahams, Norway, Liberia, Marshall Island, Bulgaria, Croatia, and Spain. Countries that are expected to ratify before the end of 2010 are the European Union countries and the Pacific Rim countries.

So what are the significant changes for seafarers?

One aspect would be the contract between seafarer and owner. Some significant new points would include:-

# The seafarer has been given enough time to read and review and also take advice on the contract or agreement before signing. What is "enough time"? That is left to the seafarer. If he feels he has not been given enough time, then he asks for more.

# The full name and address of the shipowner will have to be entered into the contract or agreement. In case the ownership is multiple layered, then all the names and addresses will be required to be entered.

# Full details of the health and social security benefits provided to the seafarer shall have to be entered. In this context, the new rules pertaining to NRIs and "foreign workers/Indians working abroad" under the EPFO may also be seen.

# Where the seafarer is liable for any reason to pay for his repatriation and other expenses, then a maximum amount needs to be set out in the contract/agreement itself. This can not be open ended as it is now.

# A :Shipowner's Complaint Procedure" will have to be defined and made available to the seafarer. The exact mechanics of this are yet unknown, but it is expected that this will have provision for referral back to flag and port state.

# Disciplinary rules and procedures will have to be set down, in detail, in keeping with flag and port state requirements. This appears to be a tough one. Each Port State will have different rules for such actions.

# On rest periods, much was expected, but little has changed. Maximum interval between 2 rest periods will be 14 hours. Extra work impacting rest hours for any reason - emergency, drills, musters, safety, peril - must be compensated.

# Paid leave entitlement is now a minimum of 40 days in each year of employment. This means 325 days work, 40 days leave, which works backwards to about 3.75 days per month. Pro-rata if employed for less than a year. In other words, for a 3-month contract, onboard for 2 months and 20 days entitles you to 10 days leave. Encashment of leave permitted.

# Termination of contract by seafarer for urgent or compassionate reasons shall be without cost to the seafarer. Notice period for termination of contract shall be not less than 7 days on both sides, and both seafarer as well as shipowner shall have equal number of days for this.

# Dental treatment will now be included in medical care, when visiting doctors ashore.

+++

Ofcourse, the above is still evolving, and there may be variations as and when the MLC 2010 comes into force in your Flag State. But expect the Port State Control to implement their version of MLC 2010 with vigour, and  soon.

Good luck. One more inspector . . .

BBC ORINOCO, where was the incident, actually?

As has been repeated in many sections of the media, the BBC ORINOCO episode off Mumbai was supposed to have taken place about 450 miles West of Mumbai. Pirates attacked, crew locked themselves up, Indian Navy landed up, crew rescued, and ship back on track again.

Brilliant work by our brothers from the Indian Navy, and hats off, thank you. Hopefully they tracked down the pirates, mother ship et al, and blew them out of the water. Either way, this blog and its writer and many of our colleagues, we thank, salute and are grateful to the Indian Navy - no two ways, the best of the best.

But somewhere the media seems to have got it, incorrect. The wire service report, PTI in this case, is here, and carried in toto by most media:-

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_navy-foils-piracy-bid-450-nautical-miles-off-mumbai_1465678

There are some pretty photos up on rediff too, slideshow:--

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-how-indian-navy-rescued-a-ship-from-pirates/20101112.htm

But. But. But. Do we believe everything the media says, all the time?

Discreet grapevine informs some of us that the actual attack took place just off the Western limits of Bombay High, around 175 miles West of Mumbai, and the pirates were probably "locals".

A cap was presented to the Master of the BBC ORINOCO by the rescue team, apparently, on behalf of the Indian Navy.

So, where was this incident, and if it is right off Bombay high, then what are we looking at? One can understand the discretion on the part of the Indian Navy, but this is extremely serious, right on our doorstep and "local".

Somali piracy now all over the Arabian Sea.

And here is where Al jazeera television gives us seafarers a different camera eye's view on the issue of piracy in the Arabian Sea.

http://www.marinebuzz.com/2009/07/03/somali-piracy-al-jazeera-videos-reveal-more/

The latest attacks, 300-400 miles west of Mangalore and Mumbai, reportedly by speedboats launched from mother ship / deep sea trawlers, makes this appear as more than just some bad dream that will go away.

The bigger issues here are:-

# psychological impact of ship's complement, especially the Master, when heading through the Arabian Sea. Imagine a voyage from, say, West Coast of India to literally anywhere in the world. Are we even aware of what the Master has to answer from crew, onboard ships with nothing more than fire-hose and SSO certificates, when we also know that other ships in the area are carrying armed guards?

# will the crew/officers get their wages when captured is another issue which the Master and company do not have an answer for. A quick poll indicated that people expect atleast triple wages while captured, and some heavy insurance in case of any damage caused during the capture.

One way out would be for the authorities, DGShipping, to ensure that all ships carrying Indian seafarers should:-

* provide insurance equal to total salary paid out monthly to their families while under capture by taking out policies equal to 24 months, and then pay the hardship allowance at twice that again when released.
*provide death/disability insurance equal to atleast 120 months total salary for all seafarers trading Arabian Sea.

This would obviously be in addition to the normal insurance and other benefits in case of any incidents.

I have met some people who have been released after hijacking, or after they were jailed abroad, and most of them have had their spirits broken.

Your views, please? Why should being captured by pirates be treated as anything lesser than a major disability, while on active duty??

Do you know that some seafarers have had to beg for their wages, and what their families are going through while the breadwinners are captured??

Piracy in Indonesian waters . . .

Here's an email from a batchmate, laconic, matter of fact. Identities, ship, company name protected and held back for obvious reasons.

""Hi Veeresh.Yes the vessel was attacked in Indonesian waters. Nothing serious. They just stole some cash and laptops from 4 crew members including myself. Where are you these days. I hope to meet you in the next get together. In case you come to . . .""

These are not just the salts of the seas, but the salts of the earth. Salute, batchmate buddy - and this was a huge tanker in ballast.

Piracy is an issue not just in the Gulf of Aden or Somalia, but in many other parts of the world, and India is increasingly not immune. A crude oil tanker was attacked just about 340 miles west of New Mangalore, with a mother ship suspected to be about 14 miles away. And as I write this, news comes in that the HANNIBAL II was hijacked from close to the Indian coast while en route Malaysia to Suez.

An Indian Master Mariner's account of being held on a hijacked ship can be found here:-

http://www.daijiworld.com/chan/exclusive_arch.asp?ex_id=994

There is no dearth of reportage on the internet, but very few first person reports, and I look forward to seafarers sending me their views as well as accounts. Identities will be protected.