Safety at Sea: ‘Diminished role for armed guards despite piracy risks’

Credit: Safety at Sea - Koichi Kamoshida/Getty Images

Director David Friesem talks to Gabriella Twining about the complexities of the use of PMSCs and why any use of private security services should always be preceded by a rigorous Voyage Risk Assessment.

7 October 2020

Safety at Sea’s Gabriella Twining reached out to Risk Intelligence for a qualified perspective on the diminishing use by the shipping industry of private maritime security companies (PMSCs) - and what makes this type of service difficult to use in many of the world’s high risk areas. Although armed guards have a high success rate in preventing pirates from boarding vessels, having the onboard can stop vessels from accessing the very waters they are trying to navigate through:

David Friesem says:

“The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency [NIMASA] considers it an offence for a vessel sailing in Nigeria’s territorial waters to have any person described as a security guard and/or performing functions of a security expert or bridge advisor on board. NIMASA and the Nigerian Navy only allow local escort vessels to provide security to ships transiting the GoG, which are also costlier than PMSCs."

This is particularly true in West Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, but also in the Gulf of Mexico.

"PMSCs should only be deployed after a specific Voyage Risk Assessment has been carried out", says Friesem and continues: "The assessments need to consider current threat, vessel specifics, mitigation measures, and company risk appetite."

Safety at Sea article here: Diminished role for armed guards despite piracy risks