After this week’s record number of immigrants brought to shore by the AFM, Raphael Vassallo talks to Captain Andrew Mallia about Malta’s international obligations regarding search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean.

Far from ushering in the “Silly Season”, the last week of June brought with it a marked increase in tension on account of Malta’s burgeoning immigration crisis.

Not only did Tuesday’s mass break-out from the Hal Safi barracks once again highlight security problems associated with detention centres; but the following day, a total of 266 irregular immigrants were brought to shore by the AFM’s Search and Rescue division – the largest single influx since the immigration phenomenon began reaching crisis proportions in 2001.

In the light of these developments, people have begun to question a number of aspects of Malta’s international obligations insofar as irregular immigrants are concerned. Foremost among the public’s concerns at the moment is a widespread perception that somehow or other, irregular migrants crossing the Mediterranean towards Europe will invariably end up in Malta, regardless of their intended destination.

With these and other questions in mind, I meet Captain Andrew Mallia, staff officer in charge of air and maritime operations, at the AFM headquarters in Luqa.

“Let’s start with the basics,” he replies to my initial question about Malta’s international obligations. “In dealing with search and rescue operations, regardless of whether they involve migration or not, all our actions and decisions are governed by international law. The relevant conventions, with which all local law is compliant, are the SAR convention of 1979, and the SOLAS convention of 1974. Actual operations are subject to the procedures established by the International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue (IAMSAR) Manual.”

According to these conventions, Malta is today responsible for co-ordination of search and rescue operations over an area known as the SAR region, which, at a glance, appears to be gargantuan.

Spanning more than 250,000 square kilometres, it is almost 80 times the surface area of the Maltese Islands themselves; as a result, it would seem that any person in distress at sea between Tunisia and Crete would fall under the jurisdiction of the AFM. However, Capt. Mallia feels that this observation needs to be qualified. “Our main obligation as a Rescue Co-ordination Centre (RCC) is to co-ordinate rescue operations with other RCCs in the area, and not necessarily to conduct each individual rescue operation ourselves. In practice, this means that not all the people rescued in our SAR region end up coming to Malta.”

Another impression rebutted by Capt. Mallia is that any vessel carrying irregular immigrants in our SAR region would have to be apprehended by the AFM, even if no assistance is required.

“According to international regulations, any vessel enjoys the right of free passage through international waters. As a SAR co-ordinator, we can only intervene if assistance is requested directly.”

Even here, there is always room for interpretation. “The AFM, for instance, does not necessarily agree with other competent authorities that an overloaded vessel is by definition ‘in distress’. From our point of view, an actual request for assistance has to be made if we are to intervene.”

When it comes to rescue operations, each case is unique and poses its own difficulties. “Let’s take this week’s operation as an example,” continues Capt. Mallia. “There were 266 people on board a disabled boat spotted within our SAR region. The passengers did request assistance, but also made it clear that they had no intention to come to Malta. At this point, our choices were quite limited. As SAR co-ordinators, we don’t have jurisdiction to order another competent authority to intervene. For the same reason, we can’t use our assets to transport them to another country; neither can we force the passengers to board our vessel and come to Malta against their will. At the same time, the boat in question was clearly going nowhere under its own steam. In these circumstances, the only course of action available was to explain to the passengers what we could do to help them, and then wait for them to ask for our assistance.”

Coming back to Malta’s SAR region: does the AFM actually have sufficient resources to meet its obligations over an area that size?

“Let me put it this way: we could always do with more resources. But in terms of units and equipment, and also of software and information technology, we certainly have enough resources to co-ordinate SAR operations within the parameters of our SAR and SOLAS commitments. As things stand, I would say we are between 98 and 100 per cent IAMSAR compliant.”

Evidence of this is the fact that, between 2001 and this year, the AFM’s SAR unit has rescued more than 6,000 persons in distress on the sea, with only one fatality in the course of an actual rescue operation. But while the AFM may be justifiably proud of this achievement, it remains a fact that to many people in Malta, this success rate has translated directly into an unwanted influx of irregular immigrants, with all the social and political repercussions we are currently witnessing as a result.

Capt. Mallia acknowledges that Malta’s international obligations have precipitated a national political debate, but adds that the AFM has no intention of participating in that debate. After all, the AFM’s duty is to not to decide policy, but to implement it. “As far as we are concerned, Malta has international SAR obligations, and we are the competent authorities to carry out the task. Our job is to meet those obligations within our limitations, and to the best of our abilities.”

When circumstances call for decisions to be taken, he adds, these decisions always have to be referred to the political level. “Out at sea, we are the front line of the State, and our actions and decisions have to reflect what the State sees as being correct. The front line is always political. It has to be.”