The following information is not verified. This document is an update from the initial L&Q Alert and the second L&Q Alert on the Al Wesam fleet of trawlers fishing off the coast of Puntland, Somalia.

If you have additional information to offer or questions to ask, please be in touch: urbina@nytimes.com.

LEADS AND QUESTIONS: AL WESAM TRAWLER FLEET

Leads

An estimated half dozen crew members aboard four Al Wesam ships have reached out to a human rights group seeking rescue. They claim there are more than 100 Thai, Burmese and Cambodian crew on the Al Wesam ships. Some of these men were not told that they would be working on a boat or that they would be leaving local waters, much less going to Somalia, according to some of the crew. If true, this deception would likely fall within “force, fraud or coercion” terms of human trafficking. There are also labor abuse concerns tied to these deckhands who allege harsh working conditions and little to no rest. Will the Thai government seek to identify the actual owners of these ships, which seem likely to be the same as the former Thai owners of the so-called Somali 7 ships? Will the US and EU, which have naval assets in and near Somali waters, investigate or intervene? The EU is clearly engaged on the topic and presently deciding whether to remove Thailand from its yellow card status and bump it up to red card or down to green card. It remains unclear whether the US Department of State’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (TIP) is engaged in this case.

The simplest path to getting up to speed on this case is to read the initial L&Q Alert and the second L&Q Alert, which offer explanation and documentation. But an even fuller set of materials about these ships is offered in this dossier provided by the EU to the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. It contains 377 pages of information detailing the activities of the Al Wesam fleet. The purpose of the dossier is to explain why the Commission should include the vessels on the IOTC IUU Vessels List, which is essentially a list of ships banned from fishing due to illegal activity. The report refers to the vessels by their previous names — Al Wesam 1 was called Supphermnavee 21, Al Wesam 2 was called Chainavee 55, Al Wesam 4 was called Chaichanachoke 8 and Al Wesam 5 was called Chainavee 54. The report includes details and observations of the alleged IUU activities, reporting forms from the European Commission, transshipment declaration forms, port operation logs, Djibouti’s certificate of registry for each ship and ensuing deletion notice, a description of a 2017 inspection of the Wisdom Sea Reefer (the cargo that collected fish from the Al Wesam fleet in 2017) in Taiwan and relevant correspondence with Thailand, Taiwan and Djibouti.

Previous Name: CHAINAVEE 55Alleged Current Name: AL WESAM 2

As the prior alerts point out there looks to have likely been deep complicity by the state government of Puntland and possibly also federal fishery authorities in Mogadishu in the granting of flags to the Al Wesam ships and potentially false fishing licenses to these vessels. Further, the ships have engaged in fishing (trawling for example) that is explicitly prohibited by federal law. All this begs a question about how the Somali government plans to correct these illegalities. This question is particularly timely since the former fisheries minister was recently sacked (after the Al Wesam scandal broke) and a new federal fisheries minister named Abdullahi Bidhan Warsame has now taken office in Somalia. Many people within the law enforcement, human rights and IUU watchdog community are wondering where this new minister will stand on the illegalities tied to the Al Wesam fleet and the irregularities of their operations in Somalia. To review these illegalities and irregularities, please read Alert 1 and Alert 2.

Another issue of importance is where the fish that has already been illegally pulled from Somali waters is headed. A core problem with governance on the high seas is that it is simply so easy to engage in illegal fishing because ports allow the stolen goods to be offloaded in their countries. It has been difficult to track the containers of fish that the Al Wesam vessels offloaded but it is important to follow these containers because they represent millions of dollars of fish that originated from poaching vessels. This illegal cargo is forbidden from being offloaded onto a reefer or in any port, especially those that are signatory to the Port State Control Agreement. Although the ships of the Al Wesam fleet have been operating under new names and flags, they are still the same vessels on the IOTC’s IUU list (This has been firmly proven in prior alerts). The only way these vessels can fully separate themselves from their IUU designation is if they prove to the IOTC that they have been legitimately reflagged and renamed and that their new owners have no affiliation with the former owners or their illicit actions. Until the Al Wesam fleet proves all of these stipulations to the IOTC, these vessels are still designated as IUU vessels that are not permitted to offload fish.

Alleged Current Name: AL WESAM 5Previous Name: CHAINAVEE 54

Here is what we know now about the fish coming from these ships. The Al Wesam vessels went to Djibouti to offload 46 containers of fish for shipment to Thailand, facilitated by the importer Felix Interfood Co., LTD. The containers arrived in Samut Sakhon at the end of June, but Thailand’s Department of Fisheries rejected them due to lack of documentation. To comply with custom regulations, the containers should have returned back to the country of consignment, Djibouti. According to shipping paperwork, two container vessels flagged under Panama, the Millennium Bright and the Sinar Sabang, each left Thailand carrying ten of the 46 containers that had been rejected. The Millennium Bright left on July 28 and the Sinar Sabang left the following day. Another container vessel flagged under Liberia, the Balthasar Schulte, carried the other 26 containers and left Thailand on August 1. Thailand alerted the IOTC, RPOA, WCPFC and SIOFA about the rejected 46 containers and listed the relevant container numbers, seal numbers, ships’ registration and fishing licenses of the vessels.

According to AIS tracking, the three vessels then traveled to Singapore Port – the Millennium Bright arrived on July 30, the Sinar Sabang arrived on August 2 and the Balthasar Schulte arrived on August 3. Thailand notified Singapore and requested an inspection of the vessels and containers, but Singapore did not respond. In Singapore Port, the vessels relayed the 46 containers to a different set of container vessels. The Chiloe Island (Marshall flag) took the ten containers from the Sinar Sabang and the Sinar Bima (Singapore flag) took the ten containers from the Millennium Bright. On the morning of August 10, the Department of Fisheries (DOF) received the Bill of Lading for the 46 containers and figured out that Penang, Malaysia was their destination. Thailand immediately contacted Malaysian authorities with the names of the incoming vessels, the quantity and identification numbers of the containers and the estimated arrival dates. One of the vessels, the Chiloe Island, was expected to arrive in Malaysia that afternoon and the Sinar Bima was expected the following day.Previous Name: CHAINCHANACHOKE 8

Alleged Current Name: AL WESAM 4

By August 13, the Chiloe Island and the Sinar Bima vessels had offloaded a total of 20 containers in Penang Port and the Malaysian Quarantine Inspection Services (MAQIS) had granted the import permits to a company in Penang. However, after communication with the DOF, the MAQIS ultimately decided to refuse entry to the containers. On August 17, the 26 other containers arrived in Penang on one of the same container vessels, the Chiloe Island. These containers were denied import permits, which had been requested by the same company in Penang. Currently, all 46 containers are in Penang Port awaiting departure. There is speculation that the containers will now go to Somalia, but there is still no official confirmation on their designation.

Associated with this fleet is a refrigeration ship formerly known as the Wisdom Sea Reefer and the Renown Reefer. It is suspected that the ship has been reflagged in Moldova under the name Honor. This reefer recently anchored in Vietnam and, despite requests from the Thai government to inspect the vessel, an inspection did not occur. Here are documents from the Vietnamese Directorate of Fisheries reporting the Honor’s docking in the Kien Giang province before it departed on August 2. The reefer was last located off the east coast of Vietnam on August 5. Was any fish offloaded in Vietnam? If so, why was offloading allowed by the Vietnamese authorities? Are we certain that there is no evidence that this reefer is currently carrying illegal fish from the Al Wesam fleet?

Previous Name : CHAINAVEE 55All of the Al Wesam vessels with the Wisdon Sea Reefer

Do Somali authorities have the capacity to monitor and control the large fleet of fishing vessels that it flags?

Why on the one hand do authorities in Somalia and Puntland so often complain about illegal fishing while on the other hand many of the same authorities routinely look the other way when it comes to licenses being granted against the provisions of Somali laws or bribery being used to cover up violations of federal law?

Questions

If Somalia refuses to act regarding illegalities of the Al Wesam fleet, will there be repercussions for the country such as sanctions by the Department of State or from the EU under the IUU regulation?

Why is Djibouti allowing the Al Wesam vessels to use its port to offload fish when these vessels are on the IOTC’s IUU list and Djibouti is a signatory of the FAO Port State Measures Agreement?

Background Image: Photo by Joshua Harvey on Unsplash

Contact:

Ian Urbina

urbina@nytimes.com

Revised 8.24.18

The Outlaw Ocean