CO129-541-1 Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 29-7-1932 - 3-2-1933 — Page 77

78

It is

In the opinion of the writers the intention to rob

or plunder (anima furandi) or at any rate to derive some meterial gain (animus faciendi) should be made the basis of any legislation which may be introduced. clearly not every not of unauthorised violence on the high seas which will amount to piracy jure gentium. If

the orew of a ship kill the captain but without any

intention to seize the vessel, her cargo or tackle, or to

rob the passengers or hold them up to ransom, it may be murder but it is not piracy, (21) even, it would seem, if.

in order to escape from justice, they proceed to nevigate

the vessel to a lonely ooɛal and there leave her atranded.(22)

There must, as Oppenheim points out, be an intention in

acme way to proceed against the vessel. Here, however,

the question arises whether it is absolutely essential

that the intention should be to proceed against the

vessel for the specific object of gain, e.g. to seize

the vessel herself or her tackle, to plunder the cargo or

rob the passengers, or kidnap one of them for ranson; or

whether a mere intention to damage or destroy, or to

detain the vessel or deflect her from her course for

political or other reasons, or to kidnap a passenger from

motives of private vengeance wil. suffice. Aɛ Fauchille(23)

poi..ts out, a number of juriats, mostly English and

American, with whom he states that he personally agrees,

consider....

21. See Oppenheim, op.cit. p.503, 5.274.

22. See e.g. Palmer v. Naylor supra paragraph 6.

23. Fauchille, Traite de Droit International Public,

8th Ed. Tome 1 2 Partie, p.73.

-