Solong Captain’s Six-Year Sentence Exposes Sentencing Gap In Seafarer Cases

There appears a glaring mismatch between sentencing of seafarers in coastal state jurisdictions.

Captain Vladimir Motin was sentenced to six years’ jail on February 2 after being found guilty of “gross negligence manslaughter” for his role in the container ship Solong’s ramming of the anchored tanker Stena Immaculate in March 2025.

The circumstances of his case, heard at the Old Bailey in London, are different to those of Ali Albokhari, currently serving a 30-year term in a Turkish jail, but the contrast that is even more apparent is the mismatch in due process and access to justice, says David Hammond, Founder of the NGO Human Rights at Sea.

“We do have to respect individual countries jurisdiction – but also we need to articulate the need for transparent investigation processes, due process rights, and the potential for excessive sentencing,” says Hammond.

Passing sentence on Motin, Justice Andrew Baker said the captain had fallen prey to his own complacency and arrogance. “You were a serious accident waiting to happen.”

ALBOKHARI CASE

In comparison, in Chief Mate Albokhari’s case, he and the Phoenician M’s Captain Marko Bekavac were convicted of “class A drug smuggling” seemingly without evidence to directly connect them to the drugs found on the vessel, with the verdict made after the men spent a year in prison with the rest of the crew awaiting trial.

The Panama-flagged Phoenician M was transporting coal from Colombia to Turkey in October 2023 when Colombian police found 137kg of cocaine in the aft peak tank. The drugs were seized, and Bekavac immediately informed the ship owner of the discovery before leaving port.

On arrival in Turkey, local police found more cocaine in one of the cargo holds. It appears that no forensic evidence belonging to the crew was found on any of the bags containing the drugs, and it is alleged that no crew were present when the drugs were located by police.

The crew were released from jail after a year with no charges laid, but the Turkish court sentenced Bekavac and Albokhari to 30 years, stating that the punishment was based on “command responsibility”.

MIS-MATCH IN SENTENCING

“The mismatch in sentencing between the two cases is a stark reminder of the differing treatment of seafarers in differing jurisdictions,” says Hammond. “Albokhari’s 30-year drugs importation sentence is more than a manslaughter sentence in England, having discussed this matter with an English criminal Kings Counsel.”

While the argument may be made is of two different cases with different facts and circumstances, the common denominators to assure fundamental rights protections for crew is the ongoing necessity for rigorous due process, continuity of evidence, access to a legal defence and disclosure of all evidence relied upon by prosecutors.

The human consequences of the cases continue to play out. Mark Pernia, a 38-year-old seafarer onboard the Solong remains missing presumed dead. He had a five-year-old child at the time of the collision, and a second child born two months after.

Albokhari’s wife Elena continues to fight for her husband’s release, unwilling to give up hope despite a lack of engagement from various government authorities. She felt a sense of shock, disbelief, and profound sadness at the consequences of the Solong collision. “First and foremost, my thoughts are with the family of the deceased seafarer. The loss of a life is irreversible, and no sentence can truly repair that damage.”

She too is aware of the contrasting outcomes between Motin’s case and that of her husband. “In the Motin case, there is clear evidence, clear responsibility, and tragic consequences that everyone can see. Justice was applied, a verdict was reached, and yet it is already being discussed that the captain may be eligible for release after only a few years.

“When I compare this with my own situation — where official documents state that there is no evidence against the crew, where no substances were even presented in court — the emotional impact is overwhelming. My husband received a 30-year sentence and remains in prison in critical condition, absolutely alone, knowing that even the captain of our vessel is at home. The contrast is impossible to ignore, and it forces painful questions about fairness and proportionality.”

Seafarers work under international conventions, yet when something goes wrong, they are often treated not as protected workers but as convenient scapegoats, she says. “What disturbs me most is the inconsistency. In some countries, evidence, due process, and proportionality matter. In others, seafarers can be criminalised for years without proof, explanations, or timelines. This creates a situation where the same profession is protected by law on paper but completely exposed in reality. For seafarers and their families, this inconsistency is terrifying.”

She says that behind every “case” there are human beings: families, elderly parents, spouses who are slowly losing their ability to survive emotionally and financially. “My husband’s mother has not heard her son’s voice for two years. She is being destroyed by this silence. My husband is losing his eyesight and hope, and hope is often the last thing keeping a person alive in prison. This is no longer just about law. It is about humanity,” she says. “I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking for consistency, transparency, and basic human dignity — the very principles international law claims to protect.”

IMO

The IMO responded to a request from Human Rights at Sea for comment on Motin’s case, saying that while it does not provide comment on issues of national jurisdiction, in general terms, when it comes to seafarers involved in incidents, it reminds the industry that in 2025 the IMO’s Legal Committee adopted new guidelines to protect seafarers from unfair treatment when detained in foreign jurisdictions in connection with alleged crimes committed at sea.

“The guidelines aim to protect seafarers’ rights and ensure they are treated with fairness and dignity, across all jurisdictions. The guidelines cover issues related to due process, protection from arbitrary detention, coercion or intimidation, and ensuring that wages, medical care and repatriation rights should remain intact during any legal proceedings. They also aim to improve coordination among countries, including port States, flag States, coastal States, States of which the seafarer is a national, as well as shipowners and seafarers.”

INDUSTRY COMMENT

Steven Jones, Founder of the Seafarers Happiness Index notes: “The case of Ali Albokhari and the Phoenician M raise profound concerns about what happens when justice appears stretched to the point of distortion. A seafarer who reports concerns about criminal activity should not reasonably expect that act to result in the loss of liberty for decades. When the consequences of doing the right thing are so severe, the damage goes far beyond one individual case.

Justice relies not only on the application of law, but on proportionality, fairness, and an underlying sense of what is right. When those qualities appear absent, confidence in legal systems is eroded, particularly among seafarers, who already operate in vulnerable, transnational spaces where power, language, and jurisdiction are rarely balanced in their favour.

Seafarers are not above the law. Where individuals are guilty of crimes, they should face due process and appropriate consequences. But they are also owed fair treatment, protection, and the assurance that acting in good faith will not become a catastrophe for the seafarer, their family, community and profession. If reporting suspected criminality leads to punishment rather than protection, silence becomes rational, and that serves no one’s interests.

As Shakespeare reminds us, “The quality of mercy is not strained; it falleth like the gentle rain from heaven.” Mercy, like justice, is a strength, not a weakness. When either is absent, the moral authority of the system itself is called into question.

Cases such as this should trouble all of us, as they speak not only to one verdict, but to the values we claim to, and must uphold for seafarers.”

COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY REVIEW

Hammond believes the well-established concept of “command responsibility” should be reviewed to highlight that states, the industry and employers should be taking more responsibility for engaging with the circumstances around automatic seafarer criminalisation. He is clear that it is not a burden that seafarers and their families should shoulder alone.

Source: Maritime Shipping News