What is the correct interpretation of the criterion "for private ends" in LOSC Art. 101?

Abstract

Piracy is the only crime in the world that is subject to truly universal jurisdiction, making its definition of great interest. The definition of piracy in UNCLOS contains five cumulative criterions which all have to be met in order to trigger this regime. One of these criterions, that the act must be conducted «for private ends», is subject to much debate in the international law community. The debate seems to be divided in to two main schools of thought. On the one hand, scholars have interpreted the criterion literally to only include truly private ends, such as robbery for private gain. On the other hand, scholars have interpreted the criterion widely, stating that it encompasses all acts that are not authorized by a state, thus including motives such as terrorism and political motivated violence.

The goal of this thesis is to conclude on the correct interpretation of the criterion with the help of the rules of interpretation found in the VCLT and with the help of the sources listed in the ICJ Statute.

The conclusion drawn in this thesis, is that acts that are purely motivated by “private” or “personal” ends are covered. However, if the motive does not clearly qualify as either purely “private” or “personal”, there is a need for an overall assessment. The elements identified in this thesis, which should not be regarded as exhaustive, are threefold and presented according to weight: 1. The level of private or personal motivation 2. Whether or not the act was indiscriminate 3. The excessive use of force