San Jose Discovered Off Coast Of Columbia

Xaos, I actually heard president Santos' announcement live yesterday. He referred to some new legal actions presented by Colombian citizens and institutions as the reason as to why the APP could not be completed in time before he leaves office. I know this was a personal priority for the president and that it must have been hard to abandon the granting of the final contract so close to the finish line. I guess that it become politically unsustainable to try to do so. The press has been all over this story and not always in the right way. You cannot simply trust the Spanish paper ABC. They have been the most vociferous critics of Colombian law. In their editorial mind, all these shipwrecks are still Spaniard and should not been intervene.

Compensation by weight is correct in the case of the SJ APP proposal. If you think about it, it solves many problems. Historical value, and its appraisal's complications, can be avoided. There is a scale. The contractor received a certain amount of treasure until some point measured in millions of dollars (45%), and then it goes down from there. There are total of three categories if I recall correctly: 45, 30 and 10%. Since what is taken into consideration is the metal value and not the historical or numismatic one, it becomes easier to do (as well as easier to sell politically since the overall amounts look cheaper than what they are really worth).
 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!
Translation of above Spanish article:


Spain after the San José Galleon

A major league game is played on the property of San Jose; Spain brings 3 international victories Can you beat Colombia?

By: Daniel De Narvaez | August 04, 2018
Photo: Wikimedia / MinCultura
​
Sovereign immunity is an old concept of international law in which the property of one state enjoys immunity from interference by another state in two aspects: jurisdictional immunity, which limits the power of adjudication of national courts over another state, and immunity of execution, which limits taking or interfering with the ownership of a state by the authorities of another foreign state.
Spain, champion of the league, comes to Colombia to play against the locals a difficult game of the highest legal level, having won in the US courts forcefully three tasks against zero, invoking the sovereign immunity of their warships: La Galga (1750) ), the Juno (1802) and Our Lady of Mercedes (1804). Unlike the Anglo-Saxon law of Admiralty and the debate on state ships, our title on the Spanish galleons has its roots in the Constitution of Cucuta of 1821, where all the goods that during the Colony belonged to the Spanish Crown became part of of the patrimony of the Republic.


With regard to recent statements by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Ambassador of Spain on the San José galleon, it is important to make certain annotations, review alternative legal aspects and emphasize that there are other points of view within the law that show us that these they are very complex issues, different shades of gray, nothing is black and white. The UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, to which the Ambassador refers, promoted and promoted at the time by the Crown of Spain and not signed by Colombia, thanks to a wise decision of President Andrés Pastrana in 2001, says in Article 7.1: "In the exercise of its sovereignty,StatesParties have the exclusive right to regulate and authorize the activities directed to the underwater cultural heritage in its internal waters, archipelagic waters and territorial sea. " Could it be that this important concept of self-determination is not applicable to the other 140 States that have not subscribed to this controversial one? Convention? Recall that the San José, as reported by the Government, lies within our territorial sea. The main naval powers, the United States, Japan, England, Russia and Germany have not subscribed to this Convention either.

interior-galeon-700x500.jpg
Photo: Directorate General Maritima
​
Apart from this inviolable right of states over their territorial sea, there is another ideological current that also questions and questions the validity of granting sunken state ships the sovereign immunity protection enjoyed by state ships and aircraft. According to the Convention of the Law of the Sea, Article 29, a "warship" is defined as follows:
"... any vessel belonging to the armed forces of a State bearing the distinctive external signs of warships of its nationality, which is under the command of an officer duly appointed by the government of that State whose name appears in the corresponding officer rank or its equivalent, and whose endowment is subject to the discipline of the regular armed forces. "
It is evident that a sunken ship or the wreckage does not meet the criteria stipulated here. Where are the distinctive Spanish exterior signs of San José? At the command of which Spanish official properly designated today are the remains of the San José at 600 meters depth? That is why some jurists are of the opinion that when a state ship sinks, it loses that special protection of the sovereign immunity that favors and protects it, according to international law and becomes an Underwater Cultural Heritage.
Another of the major legal obstacles that could hamper any attempt to claim Spain, is the concept incorporated in several agreements and recently expressed by the International Law Institute (IDI) in session 77 of 2015 in Estonia, which defines a " Sunken State Vessel "like the one that belonged to a State and which was used at the time of sinking exclusively for non-commercialgovernmental functions. Here would be triggered another interesting discussion on whether the San Jose was on an exclusively military mission, when sinking fighting with cannons with the English squadron of Commodore Wager, or if its function was to transport 300 tons of gold and silver, the flows of American merchants and Peninsulares of the most important trade fair in the continent, that of Portobelo, Panama, to Spain. Needless to say, given the geopolitical situation of the eighteenth century, the presence of corsairs, pirates and nations at war, it was not feasible to send those flows without military accompaniment.
Colombia also did not subscribe to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​the United Nations, although, incidentally, this Convention does not present norm nor any fundamental rule on sunken warships or shipwrecks. Thus, attention should be drawn to the important role played by the International Customary Law, which reflects the customs or "general practices accepted in the law", as defined by the International Court of Justice itself. In other words, if a great majority of nations accept a norm, convention or custom, it becomes the norm applicable to nations that have not subscribed to them and could be invoked in international courts.
It is possible, in this order of ideas, according to some sectors of legal opinion, that currently the San José, according to the principles accepted in the International Customary Law, be considered as a state ship owned by Spain subject to the protection of sovereign immunity. The fact that their remains lie in our territorial waters complicates this thesis somewhat, since the nations within their territorial sea exercise full and total sovereignty. Of course I am referring here specifically to the remains of the ship and not the cargowhich was on board, which is another equally complex issue, a matter of much discord and disagreement between the old imperial powers and those that were their colonies. Take, for example, hypothetically, just to illustrate an academic discussion, two trunks with 15 kilos of Muzo emeralds each, that would have been on board the San José, one owned by King Felipe V, product of the "fifth royal ", Tax paid by the miners, and the other owned by Don José de Ricaurte and Pulido Verdugo, owner of the mines of Muzo in 1708, (great-grandfather of dona Trinidad Ricaurte Nariño, mother of President Marroquín) with ample descendants. Suppose there was a manifesto of the shipment of those emeralds from Don José to his son José Antonio de Ricaurte y León, Treasurer Real, who resided in Madrid. Whose emeralds are these? From Spain? King? From Colombia? Of the descendants of the Ricaurte León family? Very difficult situation.
The last argument presented by some scholars of this branch of law, curiously Spanish, is based on the immense evolution of the Empire State through the years, of what was in 1708 the Catholic monarchy, a set of territories governed by the King himself , not only of the Iberian Peninsula, but also of Europe, outside of Europe and in America, thus having a supranational character. "King of Spain", as they referred to the Monarch colloquially at that time. The historical reality is that the collapse of the San José definitely affected the outcome of the war of succession, culminating in the Treaty of Utrecht between 1713 and 1715, which decisively changed the political map of the empire state and Europe. The question that some people ask, with valid reasons, is it if the contemporary Spanish nation that claims its sunken state ship is in reality the sole universal heir of that empire or if any of today's sovereign countries, territories that made up the Catholic monarchy, have the same right? Even the flag that was taken to the bottom the brave officers of San Jose has changed. Curious thesis.
In conclusion, it is going to touch the illustrious Minister Borrell and Ambassador Pablo Gómez de Olea, sit down with our future Chancellor and look for an original and balanced formula, taking into account articles 63 and 72 of our Constitution, a formula that allows us to protect that capsule of time together, with the highest archaeological rigor. The San José is a tomb of 578 sailors, soldiers and merchants, some Creoles, others peninsulares, other slaves, all patriots who died fighting fiercely against the English; we must respect that grave. Certainly that shipwreck of the Captain unites us with Spain, is a sample of our common tradition, culture and blood. The San José joins us with Spain, but it is not entirely correct to affirm, bluntly and without doubt, that in law, it belongs to you, the galleon and its cargo, to our Motherland. There must be a formula that allows us to resolve what international law has not yet clear. You have to look for it.

 

Pretty cheat the "sovereign immunity"! Depending on the time we are dealing with, the galleons were normally ships of individuals whose freight was forced or agreed. The load of a galleon, normally, was composed of 90% of individuals and 10% on behalf of the Royal Treasury. Doubtful "sovereign immunity" can be, except a nice excuse to claim dubious properties. To finish and in specific cases, many times the crown did not comply with the freight agreements. One would have to look very carefully at this "sovereign immunity".
 

MAI,

How is it all going on the San Jose?
 

The administration of the new president Ivan Duke is set up to break out the original APP (Public Private Association) to the consternation of MAC, the English consortium that found the wreck. The vice-president is working on a report and a recommendation for the new president to act on. This report has just been postponed for another 30 days. In the past week it has been published the Rodger Doodly, the guy credited with originated the project and convinced president Santos to gave his group the search permit, got associated with something called "The Clinton List" (drugs trafficking). More seriously, a local newspaper has published a letter of intention signed by previous Minister of Culture, Mariana Garce, specifying in 2015 that the search permit for the San Jose will be granted if MAC accepted a 10% payoff. How that went from 10% to the 43% once the wreck was found has raised a few eye brown, to say the least.

In my opinion (and this is only my personal opinion without any inside facts) the political differences between the new administration and the previous one are so deep, that I think it will be impossible for MAC to save their project (to no fault of their own). This is unfortunately, since they deserve to complete their project. The government of Colombia will find a set of reasons and justifications, real or not, to dismantle the APP. This will in turn affect all other applications and future project coming through the pipeline in Colombia.
 

Marine Archaeology Int. said:
The administration of the new president Ivan Duke is set up to break out the original APP (Public Private Association) to the consternation of MAC, the English consortium that found the wreck. The vice-president is working on a report and a recommendation for the new president to act on. This report has just been postponed for another 30 days. In the past week it has been published the Rodger Doodly, the guy credited with originated the project and convinced president Santos to gave his group the search permit, got associated with something called "The Clinton List" (drugs trafficking). More seriously, a local newspaper has published a letter of intention signed by previous Minister of Culture, Mariana Garce, specifying in 2015 that the search permit for the San Jose will be granted if MAC accepted a 10% payoff. How that went from 10% to the 43% once the wreck was found has raised a few eye brown, to say the least.

In my opinion (and this is only my personal opinion without any inside facts) the political differences between the new administration and the previous one are so deep, that I think it will be impossible for MAC to save their project (to no fault of their own). This is unfortunately, since they deserve to complete their project. The government of Colombia will find a set of reasons and justifications, real or not, to dismantle the APP. This will in turn affect all other applications and future project coming through the pipeline in Colombia.
Click to expand...

WOW! Like I said in another thread, 20 years from now the remains of the San Jose will still be where it is.
 

Last edited:
Sad.
Where's Captain Nemo's sub when you could really use it? Salvaging SUBmerged metal deposits with a SUBmarine may be the only chance we have.

Yanno...I tire of endlessy being subjected to the over-used and far-from-accurate term "submerged cultural heritage". Let's all face it - if a wreck does not promise substantial 'submerged valuables" the government and NGO archaeologists in the western hemisphere do not give a solitary damn about the contents.
 

Thanks MIA, I had to read that over about 3 times to track what is happening.

Not many takers at 10% (and probably self funded to begin the project)on the face of it, unless they are looking at the multi-$Billion valuation, then it becomes a bit more palatable.

While the unreasonable (now) $20 Billion valuations are out there, what is a reasonable valuation for this wreck? I have seen anything from $2 Billion years ago to the now unreasonable valuations.

I seem to recall the Atocha was was valued in the $Billions, but in reality was around $400 million?
 

Last edited:
If you ask me, the valuation of $1-2B is reasonable in the case of the San Jose. However, 1/3 of the shipwreck seems to have been blown away (the bow) and is scattered in two different areas at 600 meters depth. Considering that no 100% is ever achievable in any recovery effort, I would say that $1B would be a safe bet.
 

Considering the manifest, a whole lot, on a good day, seems like around $1 Billion at best, if they released it in small lots.
Not sure of Colombia's intentions, but if they intend to museum even 25% of the recovery, the salvors at 10% are basically covering costs.
 

Last edited:
PDY25 said:
Looks like a Colombian court just issued a ruling in favor of SSA.
Click to expand...

Just the opposite. Colombia ordered an embargo on the salvage and says SSA does not have the right to any of the San Jose treasure because they have the wrong location. That doesn't sound like any favor to SSA.
 

Salvor6 said:
Just the opposite. Colombia ordered an embargo on the salvage and says SSA does not have the right to any of the San Jose treasure because they have the wrong location. That doesn't sound like any favor to SSA.
Click to expand...

Maybe you are right Salvor. I read it quickly and may have misunderstood what it said. I was under the impression that it had previously been determined that SSA had the wrong location and that MAC had actually found the San Jose in a different spot and that until just recently the Colombian government was going to give out a salvage permit to MAC. I took the embargo decision along with a mention of SSA and thought this must be something good for them, but it seems I may have misinterpreted what it meant.
 

You must have read it really, really quickly...even the title says the Court embargoed the treasure!
 

Is there a point to your post Xaos? Why don't you try contributing something useful for a change?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Aquamarine From 1715 Fleet?

⬅️ Previous Thread

HMS Victory 1744 Salvage Effort

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
High Plains Prospectors

Latest Discussions

Back
Top