The Safe Harbour Issue and the Justifications for Crimes under the Penal Code of Somalia

The International Maritime Organization encourages countries to offer assistance to vessels in distress. Before they take the decision, allcountries are expected to perform a risk assessment. They should not reject any refuge applications by distressed vessels before carrying it out. Often, the requested access to the place of refuge is also granted to vessels which constitute some potential thread. However, even if the shelter provision was based on a perfect risk calculation, severe undesired damages may exceptionally occur. Moreover, they may outweigh the values that were expected to be rescued. Such exceptional situations are not entirely ruled out, regretfully. They raise the issue of risk justification: as to whether it was reasonable or not to undertake the risk. This issue makes it necessary to clarify the general concept of risk. Refusals of admittance in cases of distress are not ruled out either. They may also raise questions about justifications in penal law. Mostly, such questions concern the state of necessity, when the distress has been caused intentionally and to make the costal authorities grant access to a targeted place of refuge. Under Article 36.1 of the Somali Penal Code, admittance shall be refused in this case. However, the author maintains the opposite solution; he argues that the Article should be modified, accordingly, as in most foreign countries.