ONLINE CURRENTS VOL3 - Flipbook - Page 12
in fringe practices as it absolves them from likely oversight or investigation, as in the case of
Keith Davis. The very system, in other words, is set up to encourage opaqueness and avoid
scrutiny and transparency.
Hypothetically, as an attempt to regulate these kinds of discrepancies, UNCLOS legislation
further stipulates that if there was a failure to exercise due diligence, then the flag state is
held responsible under international law. But in practice someone or something has to be
significantly affronted to allege an absence of due diligence, full in the knowledge that if they
choose to do so then their own practices on the high seas are likely to be brought under
scrutiny. And no stakeholder on the world’s oceans is interested in having a spotlight shone
on its activities.
The only reason the disappearance of Keith Davis reached anybody’s attention was not due
to any kind of policy-making or due diligence, but was exclusively down to the fact that his
family made very public protestations on the matter, believing foul play had played a part in
his demise. Fishery colleague and close friend to Davis, Bubba Cook, agrees:
"(Davis) had 16 years of service. And there is no question in my mind that he was as
professional and as careful and safe as anyone could be… The inevitable conclusion is that
something had to have happened to him. To this day, I'm convinced that he saw something
that the people that were on that vessel didn't want him to see." 11
12
