India is set on growth trajectory despite scandals and corruption, whilst we are going full speed astern, although we have the same mindset, culture, agriculture, corruption and close proximity with a common spoken language as lingua franca, which is the binding factor and strong force of communication.
Pakistanis are fascinated by Indian movies so are the Indians with our TV serials. During my last visit recently I gathered the impression whilst meeting with government officials and literary circles that there exists a strong desire for co-operation, travel, communication, exchange of views and comprehension of improving the relations, barring radicals on both ends of divide.
There has been a real effort made as a second track diplomacy. Unfortunate, however, Bombay incident distanced us. However, I recall that all Pakistanis vehemently condemned the barbaric act and I in person called my friend secretary Transport, Chairman SCI and others with whom I interacted at IMO London meetings to enquire about their welfare. We were equally disturbed, thus I wrote a column in Indian papers not only condemning the attack but sympathising with grieved families.
However now WikiLeaks reflects different home-grown perspectives, which Indians may realise as the verity. The debated sell-out of Raymond Davis is not too different from defection of Major Rajbender Singh of RAW via Khatmandu to USA and a lady of national security in 2006 as reported. The problem of sell-out is equally ingrained on both sides, if we peep into the history and culture of Sub-continent. Let us give a chance to cricket diplomacy, once again and avail this God-sent opportunity to reduce tension.
There are many issues that need to be resolved, be they the Indus Basin Water, rights of lower riparian, trade volume in favour of India and the long outstanding issue of Kashmir. I remain committed that all problems, if not resolved, can be eased to some extent by people-to-people contact instead of being left to hawks or doves on both ends of the divide.
I am sure that reason can wrestle with terrors and overthrow them. The conflicts, which attract more attention in the news tend either to be political and military in nature, or they involve the struggle between people and the natural environment when, in floods, drought and plague, it turns hostile. But behind these, and detached from them because it is a struggle whose proportions are those of history itself, is another struggle, a profound and consequential one because it shapes long-term human destinies.
This is the struggle of ideas, expressing itself in terms of ideologies, politics and the consequential framework, which determines belief and moralities. Our understanding of the human situation, and the choices we make in managing the unruly and difficult complexities of social existence, are founded on ideas - usually, ideas systematised into theories.
Ultimately it is ideas that drive nations and people to peace or war, which shapes systems under which they live and which determines how the world's scarce resources are shared among them. Ideas matter, so does the question of reason, by which ideas live and die.
Indian and Pakistani governments must comprehend that reason is the armament of ideas, the weapon employed in conflicts between viewpoints. Reason is an absolute which rightly used, can settle disputes and guide us to truth instead of post modernist views that authorities are more powerful than reason, such as race, tradition, nature or supernatural entities.
The muddle is in the thinking of policy makers on both ends of the divide, they offer a list of virtues, emotion and faith. I feel that all but the last, if un-governed by reason, are exactly the stuff which fuels fanaticism on both sides and ends up in holy/territorial wars. The Europeans at last, after many feuds, have learned to co-exist, why can't we see the light of reason to stay as good neighbours respecting mutual sovereignty.
The world is changing the arch-enemies, Russians and Americans are talking about 'no visa regime' and EU and Russia are on the same page to avoid stereotypes of confrontation that will be dispelled by human-to-human contact, for a better understanding to shun the political propaganda. A visa regime is, fundamentally, a political statement by the government of two countries. It is their way of indicating the relationship they wish to maintain.
It is not security concern which governs the practice of rigid visa controls together with the barbaric requirement of Police reporting. It is their political resolve to keep the peoples apart and retain a tight grip of information. I had travelled in India honourably exempted from police reporting.
However, in March, on an invitation from the Chairman of Shipping Corporation of India, I was promptly issued a police reporting visa, thus the only option I had was to decline to travel due to the indignity reporting to police as I am a respectable citizen, not a criminal.
The High Commissioner of India is a polite diplomat in true sense of the word, who tries to improve relations, by interacting with bureaucrats more loyal than the king, who score points by inserting police reporting/delaying to humiliate and deter people-to-people contacts. The attitude may not be different at Pakistan High Commission in Delhi, but our High Commissioner is equally competent, as I know.
After partition there was no visa regime for travel between India and Pakistan, but on July 18, 1948, India unilaterally announced the imposition of permit system, confined to western border. Inter-dominion conference was held at Lahore on 22-23 July 1948 and India explained that the requirement of permit was to regulate a two-way traffic as opposed to one way traffic. Pakistan's cabinet decided on September 4, 1948 to impose permit system, on eastern as well western borders retaliating to the Indian move.
The proponent of permit system as per history is Vallabhai Patel who feared that some of the Muslims were returning to India and asking Sharnarthees to vacate their occupied houses. This is said to have caused Nehru's dismay. In 1952 came the India-Pakistan Passport, replaced in 1965 by International Passport. It is time for both governments to take an overview of these curbs, in light of the realities of 2011. The public opinion in both countries asserts itself jointly and in organised manner to end the partition of hearts and minds.
I was the proponent of Pakistan-India Shipping Protocol and the same was signed in 2006 after three years of negotiations, which yielded positive results to mutual advantage. In fact, our PNSC benefited more than the Indians. I also presented a feasibility study to Indian minister in Delhi for starting Karachi-Mumbai ferry service, but since I relinquished my charge in 2007, no progress has been made.
The ferry service is an economically viable operation and I presented the same to the managers of Aman Ki Asha to follow up. The direct route will boost trade instead of trading through Colombo and Dubai, and freight will be economical. India must also remove the non-tariff barriers to offset the balance of trade in favour of India.
The cement exporters are keen to export cement to India due to their massive growth and having surplus capacity. There are ample opportunities to cooperate, like Indian merchant ships are short of qualified officers and have allowed Indian ship-owners to recruit from 16 countries; Pakistan has a surplus, of such qualified cadres and Indian appetite can be met.
We have to give a kick-start, so that a new day dawns on the sub-continent with common people freely visiting Saarc countries and not only the privileged, politicians and business community who pay 2000 to 3000 dollars to get a two-year Saarc visa, a discrimination. We must dispel suspicion and allow free travel and no visa regime as that proposed by Russia and EU. We need the will to make it happen, as I feel that it is the desire of masses on both ends of the divide, due to cultural ties and gastronomic habits, relishing the same recipe of sumptuous foods. Let us join hands to pull down the obscene barriers and contend to remove the occlusive seal.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Why high-seas piracy is here to stay
India is set on growth trajectory despite scandals and corruption, whilst we are going full speed astern, although we have the same mindset, culture, agriculture, corruption and close proximity with a common spoken language as lingua franca, which is the binding factor and strong force of communication.
Pakistanis are fascinated by Indian movies so are the Indians with our TV serials. During my last visit recently I gathered the impression whilst meeting with government officials and literary circles that there exists a strong desire for co-operation, travel, communication, exchange of views and comprehension of improving the relations, barring radicals on both ends of divide.
There has been a real effort made as a second track diplomacy. Unfortunate, however, Bombay incident distanced us. However, I recall that all Pakistanis vehemently condemned the barbaric act and I in person called my friend secretary Transport, Chairman SCI and others with whom I interacted at IMO London meetings to enquire about their welfare. We were equally disturbed, thus I wrote a column in Indian papers not only condemning the attack but sympathising with grieved families.
However now WikiLeaks reflects different home-grown perspectives, which Indians may realise as the verity. The debated sell-out of Raymond Davis is not too different from defection of Major Rajbender Singh of RAW via Khatmandu to USA and a lady of national security in 2006 as reported. The problem of sell-out is equally ingrained on both sides, if we peep into the history and culture of Sub-continent. Let us give a chance to cricket diplomacy, once again and avail this God-sent opportunity to reduce tension.
There are many issues that need to be resolved, be they the Indus Basin Water, rights of lower riparian, trade volume in favour of India and the long outstanding issue of Kashmir. I remain committed that all problems, if not resolved, can be eased to some extent by people-to-people contact instead of being left to hawks or doves on both ends of the divide.
I am sure that reason can wrestle with terrors and overthrow them. The conflicts, which attract more attention in the news tend either to be political and military in nature, or they involve the struggle between people and the natural environment when, in floods, drought and plague, it turns hostile. But behind these, and detached from them because it is a struggle whose proportions are those of history itself, is another struggle, a profound and consequential one because it shapes long-term human destinies.
This is the struggle of ideas, expressing itself in terms of ideologies, politics and the consequential framework, which determines belief and moralities. Our understanding of the human situation, and the choices we make in managing the unruly and difficult complexities of social existence, are founded on ideas - usually, ideas systematised into theories.
Ultimately it is ideas that drive nations and people to peace or war, which shapes systems under which they live and which determines how the world's scarce resources are shared among them. Ideas matter, so does the question of reason, by which ideas live and die.
Indian and Pakistani governments must comprehend that reason is the armament of ideas, the weapon employed in conflicts between viewpoints. Reason is an absolute which rightly used, can settle disputes and guide us to truth instead of post modernist views that authorities are more powerful than reason, such as race, tradition, nature or supernatural entities.
The muddle is in the thinking of policy makers on both ends of the divide, they offer a list of virtues, emotion and faith. I feel that all but the last, if un-governed by reason, are exactly the stuff which fuels fanaticism on both sides and ends up in holy/territorial wars. The Europeans at last, after many feuds, have learned to co-exist, why can't we see the light of reason to stay as good neighbours respecting mutual sovereignty.
The world is changing the arch-enemies, Russians and Americans are talking about 'no visa regime' and EU and Russia are on the same page to avoid stereotypes of confrontation that will be dispelled by human-to-human contact, for a better understanding to shun the political propaganda. A visa regime is, fundamentally, a political statement by the government of two countries. It is their way of indicating the relationship they wish to maintain.
It is not security concern which governs the practice of rigid visa controls together with the barbaric requirement of Police reporting. It is their political resolve to keep the peoples apart and retain a tight grip of information. I had travelled in India honourably exempted from police reporting.
However, in March, on an invitation from the Chairman of Shipping Corporation of India, I was promptly issued a police reporting visa, thus the only option I had was to decline to travel due to the indignity reporting to police as I am a respectable citizen, not a criminal.
The High Commissioner of India is a polite diplomat in true sense of the word, who tries to improve relations, by interacting with bureaucrats more loyal than the king, who score points by inserting police reporting/delaying to humiliate and deter people-to-people contacts. The attitude may not be different at Pakistan High Commission in Delhi, but our High Commissioner is equally competent, as I know.
After partition there was no visa regime for travel between India and Pakistan, but on July 18, 1948, India unilaterally announced the imposition of permit system, confined to western border. Inter-dominion conference was held at Lahore on 22-23 July 1948 and India explained that the requirement of permit was to regulate a two-way traffic as opposed to one way traffic. Pakistan's cabinet decided on September 4, 1948 to impose permit system, on eastern as well western borders retaliating to the Indian move.
The proponent of permit system as per history is Vallabhai Patel who feared that some of the Muslims were returning to India and asking Sharnarthees to vacate their occupied houses. This is said to have caused Nehru's dismay. In 1952 came the India-Pakistan Passport, replaced in 1965 by International Passport. It is time for both governments to take an overview of these curbs, in light of the realities of 2011. The public opinion in both countries asserts itself jointly and in organised manner to end the partition of hearts and minds.
I was the proponent of Pakistan-India Shipping Protocol and the same was signed in 2006 after three years of negotiations, which yielded positive results to mutual advantage. In fact, our PNSC benefited more than the Indians. I also presented a feasibility study to Indian minister in Delhi for starting Karachi-Mumbai ferry service, but since I relinquished my charge in 2007, no progress has been made.
The ferry service is an economically viable operation and I presented the same to the managers of Aman Ki Asha to follow up. The direct route will boost trade instead of trading through Colombo and Dubai, and freight will be economical. India must also remove the non-tariff barriers to offset the balance of trade in favour of India.
The cement exporters are keen to export cement to India due to their massive growth and having surplus capacity. There are ample opportunities to cooperate, like Indian merchant ships are short of qualified officers and have allowed Indian ship-owners to recruit from 16 countries; Pakistan has a surplus, of such qualified cadres and Indian appetite can be met.
We have to give a kick-start, so that a new day dawns on the sub-continent with common people freely visiting Saarc countries and not only the privileged, politicians and business community who pay 2000 to 3000 dollars to get a two-year Saarc visa, a discrimination. We must dispel suspicion and allow free travel and no visa regime as that proposed by Russia and EU. We need the will to make it happen, as I feel that it is the desire of masses on both ends of the divide, due to cultural ties and gastronomic habits, relishing the same recipe of sumptuous foods. Let us join hands to pull down the obscene barriers and contend to remove the occlusive seal.
Pakistanis are fascinated by Indian movies so are the Indians with our TV serials. During my last visit recently I gathered the impression whilst meeting with government officials and literary circles that there exists a strong desire for co-operation, travel, communication, exchange of views and comprehension of improving the relations, barring radicals on both ends of divide.
There has been a real effort made as a second track diplomacy. Unfortunate, however, Bombay incident distanced us. However, I recall that all Pakistanis vehemently condemned the barbaric act and I in person called my friend secretary Transport, Chairman SCI and others with whom I interacted at IMO London meetings to enquire about their welfare. We were equally disturbed, thus I wrote a column in Indian papers not only condemning the attack but sympathising with grieved families.
However now WikiLeaks reflects different home-grown perspectives, which Indians may realise as the verity. The debated sell-out of Raymond Davis is not too different from defection of Major Rajbender Singh of RAW via Khatmandu to USA and a lady of national security in 2006 as reported. The problem of sell-out is equally ingrained on both sides, if we peep into the history and culture of Sub-continent. Let us give a chance to cricket diplomacy, once again and avail this God-sent opportunity to reduce tension.
There are many issues that need to be resolved, be they the Indus Basin Water, rights of lower riparian, trade volume in favour of India and the long outstanding issue of Kashmir. I remain committed that all problems, if not resolved, can be eased to some extent by people-to-people contact instead of being left to hawks or doves on both ends of the divide.
I am sure that reason can wrestle with terrors and overthrow them. The conflicts, which attract more attention in the news tend either to be political and military in nature, or they involve the struggle between people and the natural environment when, in floods, drought and plague, it turns hostile. But behind these, and detached from them because it is a struggle whose proportions are those of history itself, is another struggle, a profound and consequential one because it shapes long-term human destinies.
This is the struggle of ideas, expressing itself in terms of ideologies, politics and the consequential framework, which determines belief and moralities. Our understanding of the human situation, and the choices we make in managing the unruly and difficult complexities of social existence, are founded on ideas - usually, ideas systematised into theories.
Ultimately it is ideas that drive nations and people to peace or war, which shapes systems under which they live and which determines how the world's scarce resources are shared among them. Ideas matter, so does the question of reason, by which ideas live and die.
Indian and Pakistani governments must comprehend that reason is the armament of ideas, the weapon employed in conflicts between viewpoints. Reason is an absolute which rightly used, can settle disputes and guide us to truth instead of post modernist views that authorities are more powerful than reason, such as race, tradition, nature or supernatural entities.
The muddle is in the thinking of policy makers on both ends of the divide, they offer a list of virtues, emotion and faith. I feel that all but the last, if un-governed by reason, are exactly the stuff which fuels fanaticism on both sides and ends up in holy/territorial wars. The Europeans at last, after many feuds, have learned to co-exist, why can't we see the light of reason to stay as good neighbours respecting mutual sovereignty.
The world is changing the arch-enemies, Russians and Americans are talking about 'no visa regime' and EU and Russia are on the same page to avoid stereotypes of confrontation that will be dispelled by human-to-human contact, for a better understanding to shun the political propaganda. A visa regime is, fundamentally, a political statement by the government of two countries. It is their way of indicating the relationship they wish to maintain.
It is not security concern which governs the practice of rigid visa controls together with the barbaric requirement of Police reporting. It is their political resolve to keep the peoples apart and retain a tight grip of information. I had travelled in India honourably exempted from police reporting.
However, in March, on an invitation from the Chairman of Shipping Corporation of India, I was promptly issued a police reporting visa, thus the only option I had was to decline to travel due to the indignity reporting to police as I am a respectable citizen, not a criminal.
The High Commissioner of India is a polite diplomat in true sense of the word, who tries to improve relations, by interacting with bureaucrats more loyal than the king, who score points by inserting police reporting/delaying to humiliate and deter people-to-people contacts. The attitude may not be different at Pakistan High Commission in Delhi, but our High Commissioner is equally competent, as I know.
After partition there was no visa regime for travel between India and Pakistan, but on July 18, 1948, India unilaterally announced the imposition of permit system, confined to western border. Inter-dominion conference was held at Lahore on 22-23 July 1948 and India explained that the requirement of permit was to regulate a two-way traffic as opposed to one way traffic. Pakistan's cabinet decided on September 4, 1948 to impose permit system, on eastern as well western borders retaliating to the Indian move.
The proponent of permit system as per history is Vallabhai Patel who feared that some of the Muslims were returning to India and asking Sharnarthees to vacate their occupied houses. This is said to have caused Nehru's dismay. In 1952 came the India-Pakistan Passport, replaced in 1965 by International Passport. It is time for both governments to take an overview of these curbs, in light of the realities of 2011. The public opinion in both countries asserts itself jointly and in organised manner to end the partition of hearts and minds.
I was the proponent of Pakistan-India Shipping Protocol and the same was signed in 2006 after three years of negotiations, which yielded positive results to mutual advantage. In fact, our PNSC benefited more than the Indians. I also presented a feasibility study to Indian minister in Delhi for starting Karachi-Mumbai ferry service, but since I relinquished my charge in 2007, no progress has been made.
The ferry service is an economically viable operation and I presented the same to the managers of Aman Ki Asha to follow up. The direct route will boost trade instead of trading through Colombo and Dubai, and freight will be economical. India must also remove the non-tariff barriers to offset the balance of trade in favour of India.
The cement exporters are keen to export cement to India due to their massive growth and having surplus capacity. There are ample opportunities to cooperate, like Indian merchant ships are short of qualified officers and have allowed Indian ship-owners to recruit from 16 countries; Pakistan has a surplus, of such qualified cadres and Indian appetite can be met.
We have to give a kick-start, so that a new day dawns on the sub-continent with common people freely visiting Saarc countries and not only the privileged, politicians and business community who pay 2000 to 3000 dollars to get a two-year Saarc visa, a discrimination. We must dispel suspicion and allow free travel and no visa regime as that proposed by Russia and EU. We need the will to make it happen, as I feel that it is the desire of masses on both ends of the divide, due to cultural ties and gastronomic habits, relishing the same recipe of sumptuous foods. Let us join hands to pull down the obscene barriers and contend to remove the occlusive seal.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Performance of ports
I reiterate what I wrote in my earlier article published in Business Recorderthat deepwater Port Act be enacted and Customs Act be amended to help transshipment, so also the other legal instruments to make it compliant to the international standards before Karachi deepwater port becomes functional, hopefully in 2012/13.
It amazed me that most of the developing countries have initiated studies, realising that the law plays a significant role in the economic performance of the states and its ports. Having been associated with a study, I was amazed that even the Gulf states now realise that their ports required compliance with the international standards to remain competitive, hence they honoured the agreements or contracts that the ports have entered into through membership in the IMO, WTO and the UN.
The study is to deliberate on international and national laws as well as the different regulations applicable to the ports of the country to determine the manner and extent that the various laws and regulations influence the economic performance of the different ports of the country.
I was pleased when after the publication of my article for enacting deepwater Port Act, I was invited by the Chairperson of Karachi Port for discussion. I re-emphasised the importance of enacting deepwater Port Act and compliance of international laws etc, I sincerely hope some headway has been made, which frankly I am not aware of.
It is well recognised that the legal environment constitutes a factor that effects the operation of business. Several approaches measure the extent and quality of influence that laws have on economic development. One simplistic approach is to consider laws based on books, that indicators of a law are identified and the presence or absence of indicators then explains the influence that the law has on economic performance. It is assumed that the admiralty or maritime law that relates to port operations are the solution.
Another, but sound approach is to consider the extent that laws are effectively enforced. The presence of laws does not necessarily translate into law enforcement. It is imperative to collect data measuring the effectiveness of the rule of law, the presence or absence of corruption, low levels of contract repudiation and incidence of government expropriation.
The key players must be monitored so that objectives of the law in supporting port operations are obtained. The presence of high level of corruption hampers the effective implementations of laws, providing barriers to the achievement of economic development of the ports.
In our case, although we have the obsolete local laws, the enforcement or monitoring is not visible due to poor human resource and lack of professionalism in ports and the ministry both. The comprehension of international regulations and enforcement of law is minimal.
It was an education to learn during the study that implementation of laws and economic performance is cyclical, it also dawned upon me that there is a strong association between legality and economic development, a linear regression coefficient reflects that for every one percent increase in legality, there is a corresponding four and three quarter increase in gross national products, this was revealed by an economist friend of mine at WMU, Sweden, based on study conducted of legality variables on economic development in forty nine countries.
Some of our sane elements of the society and the judiciary are right, when they say that there can't be meaningful development, unless the GDP growth is addressed in the land of pure. I fully endorse the view that after seeing the study, shown to me by the economist friend.
The foreign entrepreneurs even don't agree to arbitration in Pakistan as our act is that of 1940, thus arbitration is carried out as per the English common law and new act of 1996 or as per the Swiss law, thus the investors are reluctant to abide by obsolete law, its poor enforcement and delayed justice. I am hopeful that now the independent judiciary will deliver to gain the confidence of investors.
It is also true that wealthy nations have resources to afford better legal institutions thus historically the law has served to protect and regulate the economic activities in consideration of private and public interest. According to my economist colleagues and jurists actually industrialisation was spurred by the development of law and legal enforcement mechanisms that protects private business endeavours.
Law and legal institutions are key to sustained economic growth, as it provides secure atmosphere conducive to the growth and expansion of port operations and port-related business such as shipping activities on an international scale, which means that there is need for laws that protect and regulate the various legal relations between the parties.
My association as advisor to Karachi Chamber brought to my notice the sufferings of many exporters due to lack of understanding of documentation and infringements of negotiable instrument act, where the bills of lading created complex problem for the trade. We have been continuously pursuing with the government for National Tariff authority to regulate the unscrupulous agents and forwarders, fleecing the trade.
There appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel now, as the Ministry of Commerce and Ports and Shipping have belatedly comprehended the issues raised by the KCCI. Port operations involve the engagement in a plethora of contracts between the shipper, the shipping companies, the loading and unloading of cargo with port and private terminals, storage of goods in port facilities, the insurance of the cargo being transported.
The ports are flooded with continuous entry and exit of goods while proposed deepwater port becomes regional transshipment hub. It will bring in the foreigners. As a result, there will be increasing demand for international standards for the safety and security of ports.
International law is a body of laws applicable and binding upon all states. International law is a normative system and its mechanism provides for common good. The international law, covering ports includes: shipping laws, laws of the sea, conventions on port operations enforced by the UN, WTO, ILO, the ratified 27 conventions of IMO by Pakistan, domestic laws and the regulatory regime.
I sincerely propose that in order to determine the effects of laws, regulations and security procedures on economic development of Pakistani ports, with the objective of determining the influence of law on the economic performance of ports and also to identify lack of normative systems, as to my experience it is in quandary, thus be identified and addressed.
The significance of our study should be how to achieve the set goals and targets for our ports. I am sure that the ministry may chart a course, which will be compatible to region and the world. I must admit that my partial submission and association has educated me on the role of legality with economic development of ports and states.
It amazed me that most of the developing countries have initiated studies, realising that the law plays a significant role in the economic performance of the states and its ports. Having been associated with a study, I was amazed that even the Gulf states now realise that their ports required compliance with the international standards to remain competitive, hence they honoured the agreements or contracts that the ports have entered into through membership in the IMO, WTO and the UN.
The study is to deliberate on international and national laws as well as the different regulations applicable to the ports of the country to determine the manner and extent that the various laws and regulations influence the economic performance of the different ports of the country.
I was pleased when after the publication of my article for enacting deepwater Port Act, I was invited by the Chairperson of Karachi Port for discussion. I re-emphasised the importance of enacting deepwater Port Act and compliance of international laws etc, I sincerely hope some headway has been made, which frankly I am not aware of.
It is well recognised that the legal environment constitutes a factor that effects the operation of business. Several approaches measure the extent and quality of influence that laws have on economic development. One simplistic approach is to consider laws based on books, that indicators of a law are identified and the presence or absence of indicators then explains the influence that the law has on economic performance. It is assumed that the admiralty or maritime law that relates to port operations are the solution.
Another, but sound approach is to consider the extent that laws are effectively enforced. The presence of laws does not necessarily translate into law enforcement. It is imperative to collect data measuring the effectiveness of the rule of law, the presence or absence of corruption, low levels of contract repudiation and incidence of government expropriation.
The key players must be monitored so that objectives of the law in supporting port operations are obtained. The presence of high level of corruption hampers the effective implementations of laws, providing barriers to the achievement of economic development of the ports.
In our case, although we have the obsolete local laws, the enforcement or monitoring is not visible due to poor human resource and lack of professionalism in ports and the ministry both. The comprehension of international regulations and enforcement of law is minimal.
It was an education to learn during the study that implementation of laws and economic performance is cyclical, it also dawned upon me that there is a strong association between legality and economic development, a linear regression coefficient reflects that for every one percent increase in legality, there is a corresponding four and three quarter increase in gross national products, this was revealed by an economist friend of mine at WMU, Sweden, based on study conducted of legality variables on economic development in forty nine countries.
Some of our sane elements of the society and the judiciary are right, when they say that there can't be meaningful development, unless the GDP growth is addressed in the land of pure. I fully endorse the view that after seeing the study, shown to me by the economist friend.
The foreign entrepreneurs even don't agree to arbitration in Pakistan as our act is that of 1940, thus arbitration is carried out as per the English common law and new act of 1996 or as per the Swiss law, thus the investors are reluctant to abide by obsolete law, its poor enforcement and delayed justice. I am hopeful that now the independent judiciary will deliver to gain the confidence of investors.
It is also true that wealthy nations have resources to afford better legal institutions thus historically the law has served to protect and regulate the economic activities in consideration of private and public interest. According to my economist colleagues and jurists actually industrialisation was spurred by the development of law and legal enforcement mechanisms that protects private business endeavours.
Law and legal institutions are key to sustained economic growth, as it provides secure atmosphere conducive to the growth and expansion of port operations and port-related business such as shipping activities on an international scale, which means that there is need for laws that protect and regulate the various legal relations between the parties.
My association as advisor to Karachi Chamber brought to my notice the sufferings of many exporters due to lack of understanding of documentation and infringements of negotiable instrument act, where the bills of lading created complex problem for the trade. We have been continuously pursuing with the government for National Tariff authority to regulate the unscrupulous agents and forwarders, fleecing the trade.
There appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel now, as the Ministry of Commerce and Ports and Shipping have belatedly comprehended the issues raised by the KCCI. Port operations involve the engagement in a plethora of contracts between the shipper, the shipping companies, the loading and unloading of cargo with port and private terminals, storage of goods in port facilities, the insurance of the cargo being transported.
The ports are flooded with continuous entry and exit of goods while proposed deepwater port becomes regional transshipment hub. It will bring in the foreigners. As a result, there will be increasing demand for international standards for the safety and security of ports.
International law is a body of laws applicable and binding upon all states. International law is a normative system and its mechanism provides for common good. The international law, covering ports includes: shipping laws, laws of the sea, conventions on port operations enforced by the UN, WTO, ILO, the ratified 27 conventions of IMO by Pakistan, domestic laws and the regulatory regime.
I sincerely propose that in order to determine the effects of laws, regulations and security procedures on economic development of Pakistani ports, with the objective of determining the influence of law on the economic performance of ports and also to identify lack of normative systems, as to my experience it is in quandary, thus be identified and addressed.
The significance of our study should be how to achieve the set goals and targets for our ports. I am sure that the ministry may chart a course, which will be compatible to region and the world. I must admit that my partial submission and association has educated me on the role of legality with economic development of ports and states.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Coal handling and its impact on environment
I had written about the need for Pakistan to have proper and co-ordinated Port Master Plan (PMP) sometime in November 2009 to generate the maximum benefits for the nation. Any PMP should also create the maximum efficiency for handling and movement of cargo.
Efficiency not only involved minimising the tangible cost to those who are directly engaged in the business of handling and moving cargo, but also the intangible impact such as environmental impact on all Pakistanis. One issue, which has not attracted the attention of the policymakers, is the handling of dirty cargo like coal, phosphate in bulk form and its impact on humans and the environment.
This brings to mind the handling of cargo at the Karachi Port. A total of 3.4 million tons of coal was handled as the Karachi Port during 2008-2009. Conservative estimates indicate that this figure will be close to 4 million tons during 2010-2011. This increase in volume will result in an increase in revenues for the port and for allied businesses and bring economic benefits to Karachi and Pakistan.
The incessant demand for energy to support a growing population has spurred ports such as Karachi to dedicate spaces as the KPT did at the Keamari, for the imported coal, which is stored in the open after being off-loaded from ships. As the volume of coal imports increases so does the size of the coal yard at Keamari. While economic materials are reaped by businesses, intangible costs are borne by others who live and work in the area.
The area where coal is handled at the Keamari area is adjacent to the residential colonies of Keamari and Jackson, which house thousands of residents, comprising people who cannot afford decent healthcare. The continued handling of coal in an area containing major population centers and storage of explosive material does not consider the long term welfare of the people in Karachi, especially those living right next to the area.
The question that must be asked is whether there is any serious long-term plan to move the handling of dirty cargo such as coal, phosphate further away from population centre. For those in daily contact with these polluting substances, there is untold suffering.
A port traffic department officer, already suffering respiratory problems, said, on the condition of anonymity that the yard now covers an area of 12.5 hectares with circular mounds of coal piled up to a height of over 150 feet at some places. Coal is transported from the berths to the yard in open top dumper trucks that spill coal on their way to the yard. He added that of all the dirty cargos handled by the port, coal was by far the dirtiest and that he was trying to get a transfer to some other berth as his health continues to deteriorate.
Efforts to curb coal dust from being carried away by the strong coastal winds blowing towards densely inhabited areas has remained cosmetic, as water sprinkling is being kept to the minimum so as not to increase the moisture contents of the coal thus decreasing its market value and utility. Then, there is the real concern about risk of a major explosion as the Keamari coal yard is situated adjacent to the Keamari oil terminals.
Despite repeated caution warnings of such potential risk by oil terminal owners, coal dust continues to accumulate forming a thick layer on top of the large tanks containing various types of highly inflammable petroleum products. Thus increasing risk of igniting the highly flammable products through what is technically known as the coal dust explosion hazard.
Despite this pending risk the KPT continues to ignore occupational safety and health guidelines for coal dust handling and continues to invest more funds in its Keamari coal yard by building a 1.87 km rail link to the yard in 2010 at a cost of Rs 55.54 million and also plans to install a new sprinkler system.
These investments will do little to reduce the environmental and health hazards posed by the coal yard but might go a long way in ensuing that the coal yard is not relocated as any such shifting of the coal yard might be detrimental to the interests of KPT officials. When queried where the water spill from the sprinkler system would end up it was indicated by staff that this spill, comprising coal slurry, will flow unabated into the sea causing incalculable damage to fisheries and other marine life.
Another matter is that the KPT plans to build a new terminal for the handling of containers in the area adjacent to the coal terminal. Phase I of the terminal will be capable of handling 3.1 million TEUs (twenty foot equivalent boxes). When all the phases are completed, it is capable of handling 10 million TEUs.
Experience in other parts of the world demonstrates that it is a natural development that following a plan for container handling, dirty cargo handling is moved to another location. Handling coal so close to a container terminal poses major risks to the employees working at the terminal. The impact of coal dust on equipment leads to frequent breakdown and could cause accidents risking lives.
The long-term solution could be to move the handling of dirty cargo from the Keamari area to Port Qasim. The Port Qasim Authority signed an agreement with Pakistan International Bulk Terminal Ltd in November 2010 establishing a US $173 million modern bulk coal and cement terminal with a backup area of 25 hectares. The facility is expected to come into operation within the next three years.
If there is proper co-ordination between the ports under a PMP, instead of investing more funds at Keamari coal yard, the government should, in the better interest of the local residents and port users, exercise greater corporate social responsibility and look towards preparing to transfer all coal and cement handling to Port Qasim away from densely populated areas.
In the interim, while policymakers mull over what to do, there are short term solutions that the Karachi Port may implement. Merchants take a long time to remove the coal from the port area and this is for economic reasons. It has been learnt that KPT's storage yard at Keamari offers storage said to be at cheaper rates than other locations outside the port.
Any rational importer would keep this cargo at the port until it is required, as moving them outside would be more costly and there are more restrictions imposed due to its environmental hazard. These costs are externalised to the residents in the area in form of impact on health, with short-term medical cost and in the long-term, reduction in their life span.
There is no incentive by officials to increase the charges for the importers as it removes opportunities to secure the coal business. In the light of these gains, the authorities have conveniently turned their backs towards the continuing health and environmental hazards being posed by the KPT's coal storage yard at Keamari.
This ignores medical risks to the local population and material risks to surrounding businesses such as those oils storage. Costs are externalised to others. The KPT may consider increasing the storage charges for the owners of coal and this should lead to speedy evacuation of the cargo at the port area.
This strategy proved to be effective at the port of Chittagong around 2006 where congestion was resolved when the port doubled the charges to the owners of cargo as once mentioned by ex-Chittagong Port Chairman. This increase in charges gives no incentive for the cargo owners as outside storage charges become lower than those in the port. It may well be that the official revenue received by the KPT will be the same or even higher despite the cargo staying a much shorter period at the port.
I commend all public and private sector enterprises who have saved the exchequer by using coal in cement factories, yet my intentions are humble without causing umbrage to any institution. The only compelling reason to pen this column is environmental and fire hazards and the health safety of the residents of the adjoining areas even extending to Clifton.
My main concern was visiting the oil pier, I noticed traces of coal dust on oil tankers berthed on OP-I/II/III and imagined the complexities ie underwriters of ship owners may demand additional risk premium from ship owners for berthing at Karachi, thus it is essential to raise the issue for the discretion of those concerned, who are competent and may be concerned equally, but for reasons best known may be ignoring the hazards.
Efficiency not only involved minimising the tangible cost to those who are directly engaged in the business of handling and moving cargo, but also the intangible impact such as environmental impact on all Pakistanis. One issue, which has not attracted the attention of the policymakers, is the handling of dirty cargo like coal, phosphate in bulk form and its impact on humans and the environment.
This brings to mind the handling of cargo at the Karachi Port. A total of 3.4 million tons of coal was handled as the Karachi Port during 2008-2009. Conservative estimates indicate that this figure will be close to 4 million tons during 2010-2011. This increase in volume will result in an increase in revenues for the port and for allied businesses and bring economic benefits to Karachi and Pakistan.
The incessant demand for energy to support a growing population has spurred ports such as Karachi to dedicate spaces as the KPT did at the Keamari, for the imported coal, which is stored in the open after being off-loaded from ships. As the volume of coal imports increases so does the size of the coal yard at Keamari. While economic materials are reaped by businesses, intangible costs are borne by others who live and work in the area.
The area where coal is handled at the Keamari area is adjacent to the residential colonies of Keamari and Jackson, which house thousands of residents, comprising people who cannot afford decent healthcare. The continued handling of coal in an area containing major population centers and storage of explosive material does not consider the long term welfare of the people in Karachi, especially those living right next to the area.
The question that must be asked is whether there is any serious long-term plan to move the handling of dirty cargo such as coal, phosphate further away from population centre. For those in daily contact with these polluting substances, there is untold suffering.
A port traffic department officer, already suffering respiratory problems, said, on the condition of anonymity that the yard now covers an area of 12.5 hectares with circular mounds of coal piled up to a height of over 150 feet at some places. Coal is transported from the berths to the yard in open top dumper trucks that spill coal on their way to the yard. He added that of all the dirty cargos handled by the port, coal was by far the dirtiest and that he was trying to get a transfer to some other berth as his health continues to deteriorate.
Efforts to curb coal dust from being carried away by the strong coastal winds blowing towards densely inhabited areas has remained cosmetic, as water sprinkling is being kept to the minimum so as not to increase the moisture contents of the coal thus decreasing its market value and utility. Then, there is the real concern about risk of a major explosion as the Keamari coal yard is situated adjacent to the Keamari oil terminals.
Despite repeated caution warnings of such potential risk by oil terminal owners, coal dust continues to accumulate forming a thick layer on top of the large tanks containing various types of highly inflammable petroleum products. Thus increasing risk of igniting the highly flammable products through what is technically known as the coal dust explosion hazard.
Despite this pending risk the KPT continues to ignore occupational safety and health guidelines for coal dust handling and continues to invest more funds in its Keamari coal yard by building a 1.87 km rail link to the yard in 2010 at a cost of Rs 55.54 million and also plans to install a new sprinkler system.
These investments will do little to reduce the environmental and health hazards posed by the coal yard but might go a long way in ensuing that the coal yard is not relocated as any such shifting of the coal yard might be detrimental to the interests of KPT officials. When queried where the water spill from the sprinkler system would end up it was indicated by staff that this spill, comprising coal slurry, will flow unabated into the sea causing incalculable damage to fisheries and other marine life.
Another matter is that the KPT plans to build a new terminal for the handling of containers in the area adjacent to the coal terminal. Phase I of the terminal will be capable of handling 3.1 million TEUs (twenty foot equivalent boxes). When all the phases are completed, it is capable of handling 10 million TEUs.
Experience in other parts of the world demonstrates that it is a natural development that following a plan for container handling, dirty cargo handling is moved to another location. Handling coal so close to a container terminal poses major risks to the employees working at the terminal. The impact of coal dust on equipment leads to frequent breakdown and could cause accidents risking lives.
The long-term solution could be to move the handling of dirty cargo from the Keamari area to Port Qasim. The Port Qasim Authority signed an agreement with Pakistan International Bulk Terminal Ltd in November 2010 establishing a US $173 million modern bulk coal and cement terminal with a backup area of 25 hectares. The facility is expected to come into operation within the next three years.
If there is proper co-ordination between the ports under a PMP, instead of investing more funds at Keamari coal yard, the government should, in the better interest of the local residents and port users, exercise greater corporate social responsibility and look towards preparing to transfer all coal and cement handling to Port Qasim away from densely populated areas.
In the interim, while policymakers mull over what to do, there are short term solutions that the Karachi Port may implement. Merchants take a long time to remove the coal from the port area and this is for economic reasons. It has been learnt that KPT's storage yard at Keamari offers storage said to be at cheaper rates than other locations outside the port.
Any rational importer would keep this cargo at the port until it is required, as moving them outside would be more costly and there are more restrictions imposed due to its environmental hazard. These costs are externalised to the residents in the area in form of impact on health, with short-term medical cost and in the long-term, reduction in their life span.
There is no incentive by officials to increase the charges for the importers as it removes opportunities to secure the coal business. In the light of these gains, the authorities have conveniently turned their backs towards the continuing health and environmental hazards being posed by the KPT's coal storage yard at Keamari.
This ignores medical risks to the local population and material risks to surrounding businesses such as those oils storage. Costs are externalised to others. The KPT may consider increasing the storage charges for the owners of coal and this should lead to speedy evacuation of the cargo at the port area.
This strategy proved to be effective at the port of Chittagong around 2006 where congestion was resolved when the port doubled the charges to the owners of cargo as once mentioned by ex-Chittagong Port Chairman. This increase in charges gives no incentive for the cargo owners as outside storage charges become lower than those in the port. It may well be that the official revenue received by the KPT will be the same or even higher despite the cargo staying a much shorter period at the port.
I commend all public and private sector enterprises who have saved the exchequer by using coal in cement factories, yet my intentions are humble without causing umbrage to any institution. The only compelling reason to pen this column is environmental and fire hazards and the health safety of the residents of the adjoining areas even extending to Clifton.
My main concern was visiting the oil pier, I noticed traces of coal dust on oil tankers berthed on OP-I/II/III and imagined the complexities ie underwriters of ship owners may demand additional risk premium from ship owners for berthing at Karachi, thus it is essential to raise the issue for the discretion of those concerned, who are competent and may be concerned equally, but for reasons best known may be ignoring the hazards.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Rotterdam Rules: Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
he shipment of goods by sea under Sea Act, commonly known as COGSA is our statute, governing the rights and responsibilities between shippers of cargo and ship owners regarding ocean shipments to and from Pakistan. Our trade is assumed to be 95% by sea. It is the enactment of the international convention regarding bills of lading, commonly known as the "Hague rules."
We, in Pakistan still rely on outdated carriage of goods Act by Sea 1925. A serious effort was made in 2004-05 to amend the outdated/obsolete carriage of goods act by taking all the stakeholders onboard whilst Director General of Ports and Shipping, Karachi, being the regulatory regime played host to all the stakeholders, ie shippers, carriers, chambers, NTTFC and others, to arrive at a consensus.
The consensus was reached bearing in mind the problems faced by trade and commerce and amended draft rules were submitted to the concerned ministry to enable it to move the bill in the parliament to amend the obsolete act. However, the Ministry of Law and Justice instead of vetting the draft bill, dumped it into to the cold storage with no outcome to-date, thus nullifying all the productive man hours put to revise the bill to address the modern day needs.
It is interesting to note that rest of the world amended the "Hague Rules" in 1968 on the premise that the "Hague Rules" are in favour of ship owners, limiting their liability to trade. The rules were replaced by "Visby" amendments, which replaced "per package" with limitation per kilogramme.
The "Hague Visby Rules" have been in force internationally for over years and performed well, both for the maritime law and the countless parties around the world who have chosen courts and arbitral tribunals, invoking Arbitration Act 1996 as per English law, whereas our Arbitration Act is still that of X/1940, thus international entrepreneurs, signing any contract in Pakistan, insist arbitration in London or Switzerland, having no faith in our obsolete Arbitration Act. My personal experience as arbitrator confirms Arbitral proceedings of contract as per the English Arbitration Law of 1996.
Three developments in the maritime world lead to believe that "Hague Visby Rules" have started showing their age. First, the big increase in container traffic required more serious legislative attention then the simple package/unit tinkering effected in 1968 Visby Protocol.
Secondly, the legal framework for carriage of goods by sea has lagged behind the use of electronic means of communication in the issue and transfer of bills of lading, which are negotiable instrument as per negotiable instrument act. The carriage of goods by Sea Act 1992, provided powers for accommodating electronic instruments in the civilised world, but those powers remained unused for lack of comprehension and clarity.
Finally, increased globalisation of markets required that some accommodation be made, even within the liner market, for contracts agreed freely between parties, with some room of departure from Hague Visby Rules, which originated, in the study of the US Harter Act in the late 19th century.
Large commercial concerns now see the carriage of goods on liner terms not simply as incidents to export, but an integral part of serial and large supply chains, which need flexibility in freedom of contract, while we still follow 1925 Carriage of Goods by Sea Act what to talk about amendments or updating.
The UNICTRAL has developed a new regime known as "Rotterdam Rules" and on Wednesday 23rd September 2009, 16 countries have officially ratified the new UN convention Rotterdam Rules and as of today, 23 countries have ratified or signed document of accession, including US.
The IMMTA local office is concerned that whilst we could not amend COGSA, how we are going to take the onslaught or Rotterdam Rules, thus IMMTA is seriously considering to arrange a workshop at Karachi in March to educate all stakeholders on the Rotterdam Rules and hopefully concerned ministries be educated to comprehend the new convention before submitting the document of accession as the rules must be deliberated before approving the convention.
The most serious issue is changing the bills of lading with transport document, thus prudential regulations have to be amended to make the negotiable instrument act/law to accommodate new requirements. The Rotterdam Rules is the United Nation Convention on contracts for the International Carriage of Goods, wholly or partly by sea, and it is highly complex magnum opus of 96 articles.
The IMMTA organised an international conference at Marbella, Spain, from 19th to 23rd September, 2010. Marlaw was also attended by two commercial maritime personnel of repute from Pakistan, who surely are willing to deliberate and educate the local stakeholders.
The Rotterdam Rules were debated in view of multi-modal transportation of goods in the 21st century, needs solution and liability regime, which is yet to be covered by Tokyo Rules or ICC/ UNCTAD rules, thus it is imperative to evolve a binding effect on liability regime of multi-modal transport operator including freight forwarders.
The IMMTA is of the considered opinion that Rotterdam Rules be implemented despite shortcomings to replace the outdated Hague Visby Rules. The International Road Transport Union is, however, urging the government not to ratify the rules as they do not want to bear any liability.
The Rotterdam Rules provides for changes in the Hague Visby/COGSA regime. It will also apply to all carriage of goods wholly or partly, by sea. The convention extends the statutory regime to the entire period the goods are in the custody of the carrier and its maritime performing parties. It is also interesting that charter parties contract, towage agreements and volume contracts are not covered in the Rotterdam Rules.
The IMMTA local office is of the considered opinion of adopting Rotterdam Rules to address the multi-modal transport in Pakistan. Karachi Chamber of Commerce Shipping Committee in the past had expressed its reservation on freight forwarders, thus implementation of Rotterdam Rules will also be netting freight forwarders in liability regime as a MTO.
It is true that the new rules address all deficiencies, in particular containerisation, extending the rules to contract for the carriage of goods wholly or partly by electronic transfer documents which are accommodated as being functionally equivalent to paper transport documents. The liner market is still regulated by rules and charter parties.
The most intriguing question is that are we ready for Rotterdam Rules? The answer is 'no' as neither the ministry concerned, chambers nor the shipping community has been educated on the new UN Convention Rotterdam Rules, which may eventually replace "Hague Visby Rules".
Let us all ponder seriously as it scares me that some layman in the ministry, simply enjoying foreign trips, may endorse the rules, whilst we are not ready, affecting trade, commerce and liability regime. I very humbly give a wake up call to all and sundry and hope the concerned ministry may take the lead. The Shipping Committee of Karachi Chamber of Commerce will be most willing to extend all co-operation to educate the stake holders.
We, in Pakistan still rely on outdated carriage of goods Act by Sea 1925. A serious effort was made in 2004-05 to amend the outdated/obsolete carriage of goods act by taking all the stakeholders onboard whilst Director General of Ports and Shipping, Karachi, being the regulatory regime played host to all the stakeholders, ie shippers, carriers, chambers, NTTFC and others, to arrive at a consensus.
The consensus was reached bearing in mind the problems faced by trade and commerce and amended draft rules were submitted to the concerned ministry to enable it to move the bill in the parliament to amend the obsolete act. However, the Ministry of Law and Justice instead of vetting the draft bill, dumped it into to the cold storage with no outcome to-date, thus nullifying all the productive man hours put to revise the bill to address the modern day needs.
It is interesting to note that rest of the world amended the "Hague Rules" in 1968 on the premise that the "Hague Rules" are in favour of ship owners, limiting their liability to trade. The rules were replaced by "Visby" amendments, which replaced "per package" with limitation per kilogramme.
The "Hague Visby Rules" have been in force internationally for over years and performed well, both for the maritime law and the countless parties around the world who have chosen courts and arbitral tribunals, invoking Arbitration Act 1996 as per English law, whereas our Arbitration Act is still that of X/1940, thus international entrepreneurs, signing any contract in Pakistan, insist arbitration in London or Switzerland, having no faith in our obsolete Arbitration Act. My personal experience as arbitrator confirms Arbitral proceedings of contract as per the English Arbitration Law of 1996.
Three developments in the maritime world lead to believe that "Hague Visby Rules" have started showing their age. First, the big increase in container traffic required more serious legislative attention then the simple package/unit tinkering effected in 1968 Visby Protocol.
Secondly, the legal framework for carriage of goods by sea has lagged behind the use of electronic means of communication in the issue and transfer of bills of lading, which are negotiable instrument as per negotiable instrument act. The carriage of goods by Sea Act 1992, provided powers for accommodating electronic instruments in the civilised world, but those powers remained unused for lack of comprehension and clarity.
Finally, increased globalisation of markets required that some accommodation be made, even within the liner market, for contracts agreed freely between parties, with some room of departure from Hague Visby Rules, which originated, in the study of the US Harter Act in the late 19th century.
Large commercial concerns now see the carriage of goods on liner terms not simply as incidents to export, but an integral part of serial and large supply chains, which need flexibility in freedom of contract, while we still follow 1925 Carriage of Goods by Sea Act what to talk about amendments or updating.
The UNICTRAL has developed a new regime known as "Rotterdam Rules" and on Wednesday 23rd September 2009, 16 countries have officially ratified the new UN convention Rotterdam Rules and as of today, 23 countries have ratified or signed document of accession, including US.
The IMMTA local office is concerned that whilst we could not amend COGSA, how we are going to take the onslaught or Rotterdam Rules, thus IMMTA is seriously considering to arrange a workshop at Karachi in March to educate all stakeholders on the Rotterdam Rules and hopefully concerned ministries be educated to comprehend the new convention before submitting the document of accession as the rules must be deliberated before approving the convention.
The most serious issue is changing the bills of lading with transport document, thus prudential regulations have to be amended to make the negotiable instrument act/law to accommodate new requirements. The Rotterdam Rules is the United Nation Convention on contracts for the International Carriage of Goods, wholly or partly by sea, and it is highly complex magnum opus of 96 articles.
The IMMTA organised an international conference at Marbella, Spain, from 19th to 23rd September, 2010. Marlaw was also attended by two commercial maritime personnel of repute from Pakistan, who surely are willing to deliberate and educate the local stakeholders.
The Rotterdam Rules were debated in view of multi-modal transportation of goods in the 21st century, needs solution and liability regime, which is yet to be covered by Tokyo Rules or ICC/ UNCTAD rules, thus it is imperative to evolve a binding effect on liability regime of multi-modal transport operator including freight forwarders.
The IMMTA is of the considered opinion that Rotterdam Rules be implemented despite shortcomings to replace the outdated Hague Visby Rules. The International Road Transport Union is, however, urging the government not to ratify the rules as they do not want to bear any liability.
The Rotterdam Rules provides for changes in the Hague Visby/COGSA regime. It will also apply to all carriage of goods wholly or partly, by sea. The convention extends the statutory regime to the entire period the goods are in the custody of the carrier and its maritime performing parties. It is also interesting that charter parties contract, towage agreements and volume contracts are not covered in the Rotterdam Rules.
The IMMTA local office is of the considered opinion of adopting Rotterdam Rules to address the multi-modal transport in Pakistan. Karachi Chamber of Commerce Shipping Committee in the past had expressed its reservation on freight forwarders, thus implementation of Rotterdam Rules will also be netting freight forwarders in liability regime as a MTO.
It is true that the new rules address all deficiencies, in particular containerisation, extending the rules to contract for the carriage of goods wholly or partly by electronic transfer documents which are accommodated as being functionally equivalent to paper transport documents. The liner market is still regulated by rules and charter parties.
The most intriguing question is that are we ready for Rotterdam Rules? The answer is 'no' as neither the ministry concerned, chambers nor the shipping community has been educated on the new UN Convention Rotterdam Rules, which may eventually replace "Hague Visby Rules".
Let us all ponder seriously as it scares me that some layman in the ministry, simply enjoying foreign trips, may endorse the rules, whilst we are not ready, affecting trade, commerce and liability regime. I very humbly give a wake up call to all and sundry and hope the concerned ministry may take the lead. The Shipping Committee of Karachi Chamber of Commerce will be most willing to extend all co-operation to educate the stake holders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)