Opinion ID: 460404
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: does the enforcement of american narcotics laws on the

Text: 31 HIGH SEAS VIOLATE THE CONVENTION ON THE HIGH SEAS? 32 Appellants further contend that their vessel was protected under the Convention on the High Seas, opened for signature April 29, 1958, 13 U.S.T. 2312, T.I.A.S. No. 5200 (entered into force Sept. 30, 1962). Article 6 of the Convention provides that ships are subject only to the jurisdiction of their flag nation, and article 22 prohibits a warship from boarding foreign merchant ships on the high seas except if there is reasonable grounds to suspect piracy, slave trading, or if the vessel is actually of the same nationality as the warship. Settled law of this circuit dictates that this contention be rejected. First we note that Honduras has not ratified the treaty, and therefore its provisions are not available to the appellants. United States v. Cadena, 585 F.2d 1252 (5th Cir.1978). 9 Even more significant is our holding that the Convention is not self-executing, and that the United States' ratification of the treaty did not incorporate the restrictive language of article 6, which limits the permissible exercise of jurisdiction to those provided by treaty, into its domestic law and make it available in a criminal action as a defense to the jurisdiction of its courts. United States v. Postal, 589 F.2d 862, 878 (5th Cir.1979). 10 33 Accordingly, nothing in the Convention prevents the United States from enforcing section 955a(c) against foreign nationals found on foreign vessels on the high seas. 34