Seasteaders made fatal mistake in measuring distance
Oh dear, Thai authorities got their knickers in a twist over a couple who want to live in a floating bathtub, ridiculous!
Nigel Joey Leggett
Tell me what would happen if this occurred off the US shoreline.
Raitiam Atjivanantha
As I am not an American I wouldn’t know but people have been living off the coast of England for decades.
Nigel Joey Leggett
It’s a hazard to navigation. A large ship travelling through the Malacca Strait heading to Phuket might not even see the structure until she collided with it. This would be especially true in poor weather conditions.
Daniel Hill
We are Thai people and we don’t want them in our motherland.
Lertnapa Maowong
They ARE NOT IN Thailand. They are outside of its territorial limits. That means International waters. They ARE NOT threatening Thai
sovereignty at all. Are they aiming missiles at the mainland?
There are plenty of these types of seasteads off the coasts of Britain, Australia and even the US. Nobody really bothers them at all. Thailand is the bully here. Not the American.
Mark Joseph Jochim
It’s now clear that he was under Thailand jurisdiction, because Thailand jurisdiction and law apply 24 nautical miles (12nm of Territorial Waters + 12nm of Contiguous Zone) from the shore, as defined by the UN.
He claimed that he was 25.92km away from the nearest shore, which should be in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and is further away from the “24-zone” right? Wrong!
Look again, he claimed he was “25.92km” away, but the UN uses nautical miles as the unit of measurement. So the seastead is only 13.996nm offshore – nowhere near the EEZ. It’s merely in the Contiguous Zone.
So he’s doomed now.
Jason R Hofer
