Maritime safety and protection of environment

While going through news items in periodicals of internationally repute on maritime industry, the first one states that the Government of Cambodia received a sum of $360,000.00 in a mere nine months from the new contract with the international shipping Registry of Cambodia as compared to $350,000.00 in over 8 years of contract with the previous operator "Cambodia Shipping Corporation". 

The second news is that since the transitional Government took office in Liberia in October 2003 it received a sum of $5.5 million from its registry of ships operated by LISCR Liberian International Ships and Corporate Registry. I always thought that the Cambodia Shipping Corporation was a state owned and operated shipping or ship management company until a friend of mine explained to me that it was the Cambodian register or in other words their maritime administration. Panama also makes substantial amounts followed by Malta, Cyprus and Marshall Islands. 

To the common people the news may not mean much except that some companies made good profit. Having spent nearly 45 years of my life in maritime industry, the news sounded alarm bells to my ears. What are we talking about? Are we talking of commercial enterprises? Unfortunately, not. We are talking about States and Governments whose responsibility it is to ensure maritime safety. How can we measure their success in terms of money? 

I shall explain my worries and anxieties about the news in a later paragraph but firstly I want to express my satisfaction to know that the Liberian Government has been able to pay its civil servants their salaries which were perhaps not paid for quite some time. It has been suggested that previously such revenue generated by the register were spent in arming groups of people to kill one another. 

I come to the real issue. A state operates a register presumably to make its contribution in facilitating world trade and commerce. It is also a commitment to the world community to uphold international standards on maritime safety and environmental protection. I say this because no UN organ or agency acts like a sovereign entity or has any administration or policing device to implement the provisions of international instruments. 

The signatory member states inherit the responsibility for implementation. It is the responsibility of the Government of the State to fulfil its legal and moral obligations. This is a governmental function that has to be taken care of by the government machinery (civil service). It cannot be a commercial venture. How can your goal be to make money when the primary obligations are to ensure safety and environmental protection? 

It is an accepted fact that in today's world of global shipping it is not possible for a State to conduct the total range of survey, audit and certification using its own resources. It has to accept the services of good classification societies to utilise the extensive global network. 

However, the State will still remain responsible for discharge of its obligations under international treaties and protocols. It must be absolutely clear that only functions may be delegated but not the responsibilities. (Please refer recent remarks of Judge Trial Court in Paris during Erika Tanker oil spill hearing). 

There must be some mechanism left with the Flag Administration to check and ensure that ships flying its Flag operate in a responsible manner complying with the Internationally agreed standards. 

The first step in this direction is to have appropriate legislation and apply the rule of law. The court will only accept a case for violation or contravention of the law ie law of the land. It is, therefore, necessary to transpose the provisions of the applicable provisions of the international conventions and protocols into national legislation with necessary penal provision. 

The second step is to set up and maintain a competent administration (preferably within the civil service structure). This will require the State to designate or create an exclusive Department, Division or Directorate to look after the Maritime administration. 

Such unit of the Administration should have the services of competent persons such as those with the highest sea going qualifications or others with either degrees in naval architecture or lawyers with an understanding of international treaties and protocols. 

The third requirement relates to documented procedures without which we cannot ensure a uniform standard of implementation. The fourth is "record keeping" which means to say faithful records of all activities undertaken must be maintained. Finally there must be provision for review, analysis and audit so that future improvements can be made in the light of past omissions or mistakes. 

Investigation of maritime accidents and casualties is a very important step in the right direction of avoiding same mistake time and again. The findings of such investigation should be made public so that others can benefit from it. Commercial companies operating registers will have no interest in casualty investigation or Port State Control, because they do not generate any fees. 

All casualty reports in particular M.T. Golden Gate and M.T. Tasman Spirit be made public for education of maritime fraternity in order arrest recurrence of errors/omissions and players be identified and be made accountable. 

In respect of a ship and the seafarers sailing on the ship, flag state is the ultimate authority whose law shall apply. There is also legal jurisdiction of a state in whose waters the ship may be, for the time being, commonly referred to as Port State Control. This control must be exercised without any discrimination however, there is a big ethical question - can we exercise control over others on issues that we do not practice? 

This obviously implies that we should have in place all the essential ingredients to meet our obligation both as a Flag State as well as a Port State. There are states which, as part of their responsibility, conduct audit of the classification societies that carry out functions on their behalf. There are states which, depending on their resources, may like to conduct surveys of their passenger ships instead of delegating the same to a recognised organisation. 

These are various ways of expressing the State's concern for its duties and obligations. However, with the introduction of ISM Code, it is apparent that if the administration keeps ISM audit and certification to itself, then it gains a controlling hand in monitoring the way a particular ship operates, the way its operates (company) response to its needs and requirements and finally how well the classification society has done its job in surveying and issuing various statutory certificates on behalf of the administration. 

It is for the administration to decide how they want to ensure their role and responsibility but they should do so in an effective manner. To delegate every thing to the classification societies without any monitoring device is a negative way of discharging international obligations. 

It is only the Flag State that can deal with matters relating to human rights and privileges. It is for them to ensure that there are fundamental rights of freedom of association. The Flag State can ensure that no seafarer should be employed on the ship without being signed on a proper. "Article of Agreement." It is for the Flag State to ensure that the wages and other employment conditions are determined mutually in consultation with the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agency). 

These may cover wide range of matters including wages, period of rest, work and living conditions, food and hygiene, medical facilities and repatriation. Flag State must have legal instruments in place to prosecute those who violate the rights and privileges of the seafarers. 

If all Flag States take upon themselves these responsibilities then we will not come across seafarers from third world countries being exploited in the most inhuman manner and then stranded around the world. Every year many Pakistani seafarers lose their lives or are exploited by unscrupulous employers/agents due to absence of legal instruments to check the exploitation. 

What I am saying so far relates to Government responsibilities. These responsibilities cannot be commercialised. They cannot be compared with port facilities that can be privatised or commercialised. I simply cannot understand how a responsible Government can allow commercial companies to play around with the Flag name and image of the country. 

In most cases the companies running registration business operate from outside the country and beyond any control or supervision. Recently I read a brochure "International Registries (Far East) Ltd 30th Anniversary" which read "Companies may issue bearer shares and are not required to disclose the names of shareholders or officers to the Registrar, Registered Agent, or any other Governmental authority in the jurisdiction". 

In another place it is written "IRI can produce a full set of company's constitutional documents within a few hours and a certificate of Good standing can also be issued in an hour." 

This is the company that calls itself the Corporate and Maritime Administrator for the Republic of Marshall Islands. What more one needs to know about these Administration run by companies with no regard to common international practice and procedure? States having the slightest self respect must say "NO" to such practices and must take its own affairs in its own hand. 

Take the case of a traditional maritime nation like, UK, Norway, Germany, Denmark or even India. Ask them how much they spend for the cause of maritime safety. Their expenditure can never be recovered fully from fees received by the Government for registration, survey or certification. Well, we have to co-exist amongst the civilised nations of the world; we have to do it. 

This is our contribution to human safety and dignity. May be with utmost efficiency we can reduce our expenses or even at best break even. There is certainly no room for commercialisation or profit. Government must not be up for grab by the highest bidder. 

Finally I have a word of advice for the Member States who feel proud of their register having made good profit. Please read this paper and develop your sense of responsibility and national pride. Get rid of the middlemen playing around with your Flag and reputation. Take it in your own hands. In the long run you have more to gain. You will have full and direct control over ships in your register. You will develop expertise. (The companies will never transfer technology. 

They do not want you to learn anything lest they lose the business). You will have contact and influence over the ship owners and you may be able to send cadets to train as future officers. You may find employment opportunities for your seafarers. 

Your corporate legislation and administration may improve. You may turn out to be a financial center for ship mortgaging. You may even become a center of ship management. All these will not give you an exact figure of profit but when you consider all the good indirect benefits, you will be much better off. 

However you may need advice and guidance. Ask for help from IMO. In extreme need employ some consultants but keep matters in your hand. I was quite surprised when I talked to an IMO official regarding their technical assistance programme. I was told that the registration of ships is not within IMO remit. I was surprised in the sense that FSI is an IMO remit and a State becomes a Flag State only when it has or opens a register. 

Whey not guide a State from the very beginning as to what responsibilities it is taking upon itself by opening a register? Once given the wrong impression of a register being a commercial venture, it becomes difficult to get them back on track. 

I am further surprised by the fact that IMO considers scrapping or recycling of ships to be its remit. IMO is the specialised agency of the United Nations to look after maritime safety and protection of the marine environment. How can dead and disused ships be a concern for safe operation when they do not operate any more? 

Why not leave that with UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) and take on board more important things like registration of ships which has a direct bearing with compliance of international maritime legislation. I feel the environmental aspects of ship scrapping or recycling should be a matter for UNEP to look after where IMO could work jointly to lend its expertise and let safety and the working conditions of those involved in the industry be looked after by the ILO. 

There is a duty for the world community most of whom operate their registers in a responsible manner to do something so that the core elements of governmental functions cannot be commercialised. Why not amend SOLAS, the paramount Convention on safety to include something like; "Member states undertake to set up or to designate one of its existing branches, agencies or departments as the Maritime Administration to look after all aspects of maritime safety and protection of the marine environment. 

The organisation, so created or designated must be under full and effective control of the Government. It must have the services of highly qualified professional people such as persons with highest sea-going qualifications or those with university degree in naval architecture and marine engineering or lawyers with sound knowledge of application o the international treaties and protocols. 

The Administration must work together with others on the floor of IMO to develop common international standards and implement the same". I would like to see Directorate General of Ports and Shipping in Pakistan to set an example but you need right competent human resource. 

The IMO has developed a voluntary scheme of SAF (Self-Assessment Form) under the FSI (Flag State Implementation) sub-committee. Most countries that turn a blind eye to their responsibilities and international obligations also turn a blind eye to SAF. It is time it should be made compulsory. 

States failing repeatedly to make any submission should be considered to have denounced the SOLAS Convention. I am sure such mandatory provision will keep Member States aware of their responsibilities. 

Perhaps such commitments on the part of the Member States (to have its own maritime administration and work within the IMO) - will discourage them from developing unilateral or regional standards. We have one world and to save and protect the earth we must work together for global compliance. If the issue has anything to do with maritime safety and marine environment then we must talk and discuss at IMO. Only global action can save the earth for the future generations. 

Maritime Administration in Pakistan may receive a shock the day IMO will make voluntary self assessment scheme mandatory. In a few years the comprehensive maritime labour convention approved in ILO Geneva will be implemented, requiring vessels to carry additional certificates and inspectors ashore duly trained to check the vessel. Are we ready, have we made any efforts or this may be another shock for the generalists or be UFO (unidentified foreign object). 

I humbly submit to Ministry of Ports and Shipping to induct good knowledgeable maritime professional at least on 5 years contract with market salary and privileges, so that these will be competent people first to comprehend and then to implement all international conventions/protocols. Time is running out fast for us. 

Let it be understood to all that the world is highly skilled/professional and thinking that a generalist can manage all is bygone theory. The government must understand that it pays very little in shape of salaries to qualified professionals but lose substantially due to lack of knowledge. 

Tasman Spirit case where we got nothing out of 8 billion USD losses claimed by generalists unaware, that CLC convention was not ratified nor Fund - 92 nor having ability to make claims on ITOP format. 

We have to make it clear that, are we ready to go along with the world or remain in isolation and due lack of our knowledge/expertise do not recover our legitimate losses. 

Whilst conveying and writing this article or previous ones, all may professionals friends question that who you are targeting too, those at helm of affairs, do not comprehend nor they have slightest concept of this business what you are preaching. Don't waste your time. 

I tend to disagree with my friends and I am confident that a new day will not only dawn for Pakistan but for our maritime industry. By writing these researched papers in my opinion if only 10% is comprehended and 5% is implemented it will give me immense satisfaction of having contributed towards the righteous cause as I myself admit that one learns with every new day. 

"Heraclitus" remarked that learning is only a means to an end, which is understanding and understanding is the ultimate value in education and its application.