Legal Authority of Coastal States on the Interdiction of Foreign Vessels on the High Seas

The terror attacks of 11 September 2001 dramatically changed the course of world events. It is observed that they have led to a re-definition of the threat to US, Europe and indeed the global security as the nexus between terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and the possibility of access to such weapons through failed states or 'rouge regimes'. Accordingly, this report examines the legal authorities or otherwise of coastal states to engage in the interdiction of foreign vessels on the high seas. The reporter used a descriptive research design method. The findings indicate that in the wake of 9/11, Washington initiated its Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), first in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) proposal to establish a comprehensive enforcement mechanism which aims to restrict WMD trafficking in the air, on land and at sea. The threat to international community through the proliferation of WMD has been recognized by both individual coastal states and the wider international community; but the methods available to deal with the threat have not enjoyed the same degree of international consensus. Any coastal state sanctioning action directed at interdicting foreign ships on the high seas would be running the risk of breaching international law and may leave the authorizing state liable to a claim in compensation. Although the PSI maritime interdiction activities breach international law, a coastal state intent on pursuing such interdiction activities has an array of options available in which to chart a course around the heavy rocks of illegality of such activities.