An inquiry probing how a tanker managed to evade an arrest warrant last May has found no fault with the authorities’ handling of the embarrassing incident, arguing that they were asked to intervene late in the day.

The inquiry report, penned by retired Armed Forces Commander Carmel Vassallo, does not actually point fingers at anyone but develops a detailed timeline of events which concludes that the Valletta port authorities and the Armed Forces of Malta were left with very little room to manoeuvre.

“There were three hours in which the authorities – had they been notified in time – could have made sure the arrest warrant was executed,” the brigadier concluded.

The report, dated June 15, was released by the Office of the Prime Minister to The Sunday Times of Malta after a request was made last month. The inquiry was ordered by the Prime Minister after this newspaper revealed the incident on May 4.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister said the document was not released before because the Attorney General was consulted about its conclusions and its recommendations evaluated. It will now be tabled in Parliament in October.

There were three hours in which the authorities could have made sure the arrest warrant was executed

The incident goes back to April 30, when the Maltese courts issued a warrant of arrest for the Marshall Islands-registered tanker, MT Atlantik. The warrant was issued after a request made by Liberian-registered company, Shannon, which claimed it was owed €900,000 by the firm that owns the tanker.

The tanker was headed for Malta for overnight bunkering (refuelling) and the court action was timed perfectly because half an hour after the warrant was issued, the Atlantik entered the outer edge of Maltese territorial waters, 12 miles off Gozo.

However, Shannon’s lawyers instructed the court usher responsible for delivering the document to the authorities, not to do so before instructed to. The all-clear came at 5.45pm.

It took the court usher another hour and a half to deliver the warrant to the three listed authorities – the Valletta Port Control, the Police Commissioner, and the Director General of Customs – because Valletta and its surroundings were choked with traffic and some roads were closed because of the May 1 celebrations.

At 7.15pm, the port authorities made contact the Atlantik, and ordered it to go to an area off Mellieħa, known as Bunkering Area 1. At first, the captain appeared to obey this order and started heading in this direction but he then switched off the vessel’s tracking system and changed course, heading out of Maltese waters.

The Valletta port called on the AFM to intercept the vessel at 7.56pm, but the tanker exited Maltese waters around four minutes later. Technically, the brigadier pointed out, the AFM could pursue a vessel in international waters but only if it had been chasing the vessel within Maltese waters first.

In the circumstances, the AFM could not have legally justified going after the vessel outside Maltese waters because it was not giving chase.

The AFM eventually told port authorities its assets were engaged elsewhere – among others, the army’s maritime section was busy monitoring EU membership anniversary celebrations in Grand Harbour that included letting off fireworks from barges.

However, the brigadier underscored that it would have made no difference.

In a reaction to the report’s conclusions, John Refalo, one of the Maltese lawyers representing Shannon, said they held out on notifying the authorities because they were waiting for the ship to berth to make sure the vessel could not flee.

“We were worried about the possibility of a leak (that someone would tip off the ship’s captain of the warrant), so we wanted to have the ship’s captain notified of the arrest warrant when only the vessel was berthed and stationary. In that case, there would have been no time for them to escape. Then everything got superseded by events,” he said.

Essentially, however, he insisted it would have made no difference had the authorities been notified beforehand.

“Legally, the warrant is effective the minute the (port authorities) are notified. When they were notified, the vessel was still in Maltese waters. Then the captain decided to switch off his AIS and sail out. So what difference would it have made if we had notified them, say, two hours earlier?” he asked.

Recommendations

Court ushers:

The inquiry report recommends that court ushers should start keeping a record of the exact time in which they deliver a warrant, because it might turn out to be vital in problematic cases.

It also recommends that the companies asking for an arrest warrant of a vessel, should start giving the court ushers a telephone number where the vessel’s shipping agent can be contacted as well as the address. In this case, the usher failed to reach the agents because a road leading to their office was closed.

It did not have any material impact on the incident but the usher could have contacted the agents directly had he had the number.

Transport Malta:

Transport Malta should consider allowing the ship to berth before starting to execute an arrest warrant. In this case, the ship was alerted while in transit, giving it the possibility to sail away.

It recommends that the details of a captain who is about to sail into Maltese territorial waters should be available before he enters the country’s confines for reference.

Armed Forces of Malta:

One of the more controversial points to emerge from this incident from the day the case was revealed was the fact the AFM said it had no assets with which to intercept the Atlantik. The brigadier makes it a point that it would have made no difference had a patrol boat been available.

However, it turns out that the duty officer who communicated to the Valletta port that the army had no available assets did not actually draw the attention of his superiors, who, in turn could have chosen to disengage a vessel from a particular activity and order it to chase the Atlantik.

Recommendations made for arrest warrants on aircraft

In his recommendations, Brigadier Vassallo – a pilot by training who is also the CEO of the Air Traffic Services – drew a page from the Atlantik incident to make recommendations for his own sector.

He suggested that when arrest warrants are issued on planes the authorities should move to disable an aircraft from taking off. He said the practice is for authorities to confiscate certain identifying documents which render the aircraft worthless. However, he pointed out that this might not be a sufficient deterrent in cases where the cargo on board the plane is worth more than the aircraft itself.

Timeline:

2pm – 3pm: The court issues an arrest warrant against the Marshall Islands-registered tanker.

3.50pm: MT Atlantik enters the outer edge of Maltese territorial waters off Gozo, heading to the south of Malta. The plan is for the vessel to refuel, a process that takes about five hours.

5.45pm: The lawyers representing Shannon give the court usher the all clear to deliver the notice of the arrest warrant to the competent authorities and the ship’s agent in Malta, Ronasons Shipping Agency. The usher was told specifically by the lawyers not to proceed with the notifications before he is instructed to. The lawyers were hoping to wait for the vessel to drop its anchor before initiating the execution of the warrant to make sure it could not escape.

7.15pm – 7.30pm: It took another hour and a half for the arrest warrant to reach the authorities listed in the arrest warrant. The Armed Forces of Malta were not on the list and therefore not notified straight away.

7.15pm: The Atlantik is sitting about five miles out of the Grand Harbour, waiting for the vessel Sea Express III, with a bunkering surveyor on board. The captain was planning to go to a zone known as Bunkering Area 4, off Marsaxlokk. However, the Valletta port at this point ordered the Atlantik captain to head to Bunkering Area 1, off Mellieħa, instead. At first the captain appeared to obey this order and started heading in this direction.

7.22pm: The port authorities inform the ship’s agents of the arrest warrant.

7.26pm: The Sea Express III is told by the Valletta port not to approach the tanker before it reaches Bunkering Area 1, and drops its anchor.

7.45pm: The armed forces are alerted about the arrest warrant by the port authorities. The AFM says it will monitor the vessel.

7.54pm: The vessel changes course to north east and switches off its tracking system. The AFM is asked to call in the vessel. Both AFM and the port at this stage are trying to make contact with the Atlantik but there is no response from the captain.

7.56pm: The port authorities ask AFM to send a patrol boat to intercept the vessel, which at this point was about 12 miles out.

8pm: The Atlantik slips out of Maltese territorial waters.

8.07pm: The AFM inform the port authorities they do not have an asset with which to intercept the tanker because they are all engaged.

8.08pm: Shortly after the MT Atlantik left Maltese waters, according to AFM recordings, the ship’s captain responded, saying “Port control, port control, course will be deflected later OK... see you later, bye’.