I might be misunderstanding the situation, but it sounds like the original captain knew what was going on and sacrificed Mohammed for his own freedom. I assume

I might be misunderstanding the situation, but it sounds like the original captain knew what was going on and sacrificed Mohammed for his own freedom. I assume the captain has original responsibility in this case. The captain left the ship and never came back. He presumably told Egyptians that his first officer is now in charge, or the Egyptians boarded the ship and determined that the First Officer was the highest ranking official on the ship. Either way it sounds like the Captain probably knew what was going on. When the Captain learned that the parent company had ran out of money, he probably was aware of these cases of seafarer abandonment and decided he didn't want to be one of them. So he left the ship, leaving the responsibility on Mohammed. Mohammed claimed he didn't really know the meaning of this responsibility until everyone else started disembarking. It sounds like by then the captain had been gone, for at least 4 months, and potentially longer. The Captain sacrificed Mohammed here. Either way, someone was going to be abandoned on that vessel. I think the Captain saw the writing on the wall and abandoned quickly, shifting responsibility onto someone else. There are lots of people at fault here. Egyptian authorities, Tyson Shipping and Marine Company (which seems to have continued operating despite all this), and the Captain. Unfortunately Mohammed is one of the innocent ones caught in the middle. He shouldn't have signed the paper as the shipping company is quick to point out. But that doesn't resolve the real issue. It would have just meant the Captain or someone else would have been forced into this situation.