Carpenter From The Marine Environment-FP1

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/258241972
International Protection of the Marine Environment
Chapter · February 2011
CITATIONS READS
3 7,632
1 author:
Angela Carpenter
University of Leeds
101 PUBLICATIONS 573 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Ship-source pollution and environmental crime View project
PEGASEAS Project View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Angela Carpenter on 25 September 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

NOVA
Science Publishers, Inc.
INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION
OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
Angela Carpenter
NS
P
400 Oser Avenue, Suite 1600
Hauppauge, N. Y. 11788-3619
In: "The Marine Environment"
Editor: Adam D. Nemeth
Phone (631) 231-7269
Fax (631) 231-8175
ISBN: 978-1-61209-265-2 2011
E-mail: main@novapublishers.com
http://www.novapublishers.com
In: The Marine Environment ISBN: 978-1-61209-265-2
Editors: Adam D. Nemeth, pp. 51-86 ©2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
The exclusive license for this PDF is limited to personal website use only. No part of this digital document
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted commercially in any form or by any means.
The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no expressed
or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is
assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained
herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in
rendering legal, medical or any other professional services.
Chapter 2
INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION
Angela Carpenter*
University of Leeds, LEEDS, United Kingdom
ABSTRACT
This chapter will consider how the marine environment is managed and protected at
an international level. It will set out a brief history of how governance of the marine
environment has developed since the doctrine of Freedom of the Seas was set out by
Hugo Grotius in the early 1600s through to the post World War II period where
developments and triggers ultimately led to a global Law of the Sea Convention. It will
then specifically examine the role of the United Nations, including discussion of the 1982
Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC), which set out to produce a comprehensive legal
framework to promote the peaceful use of the oceans and its resource, together with other
UN conventions related to the marine environment. The chapter will then examine the
role and responsibilities of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and its various
committees, as the body responsible for establishing a comprehensive framework of
legislation for shipping, including protection of the marine environment from pollution
from shipping and the safety of vessels, their crews and passengers, at sea. It will then
examine the contribution made by a range of Memoranda on Port State Control
organisations (MOUs) which have a role in ensuring that vessels comply with the various
international conventions established by the IMO and others. These MOUs, the first of
which was established in 1982, provide a framework for vessel inspections to ensure that
those vessels which fail to adhere to international standards, or are sub-standard in any
way, can be monitored. Vessels which are found to be sub-standard can, ultimately, be
prevented from operating until all deficiencies are rectified.
* Dr Angela Carpenter, Research Fellow, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, LEEDS LS2 9JT,
United Kingdom, Email: a.carpenter@leeds.ac.uk
52 Angela Carpenter
1. INTRODUCTION – A BRIEF HISTORY OF GOVERNANCE

The United Nations (1998)1 notes that the oceans and seas have long been subject to the
doctrine of the Freedom of the Seas. In 1609 the Dutch Philosopher and Jurist Hugo Grotius
wrote about that doctrine in his treatise Mare Liberum, setting down the concept that the seas
and oceans were freely available for all states to use – every nation being free to travel to (and
trade with) every other nation. Grotius argued that God created the oceans, that the oceans
were mobile and, therefore, that they should be accessible by every nation. The concept was
developed at a time when the Netherlands sought to join in the lucrative trade for spices,
woods and other goods and resources only obtainable in the East Indies. However, Portugal
sought to prevent the Netherlands from doing so by claiming sole jurisdiction to trade in the
East Indies, citing as justification a Papal Bull of Pope Alexander VI of 1493 (and
subsequently agreed by Spain and Portugal in the Treaty of Tordesillas, Spain in June 1494).
That Papal Bull followed the discovery of the West Indies by Christopher Columbus and
subsequent disputes over territorial rights between Portugal and the King of Castile (Spain) in
the West Indies and wider Latin American area. The Papal Bull allowed Christian countries to
claim jurisdiction over trade with non-Christian countries and was originally intended to
partition the right to control trade west of the Azores between Portugal and Spain. However,
it resulted in Spain claiming the sole right of navigation in the western Atlantic Ocean (to try
and prevent access to the region by British ships, while Portugal claimed a similar right in the
South Atlantic and Indian Oceans.
Cincin-Sain and Knecht (1998, pp 68-69)2 note that Grotius‟ concept of Freedom of the
Seas was eventually accepted by coastal nations wishing to trade with other nations around
the globe. Subsequently, in the 1700s, the concept of the territorial waters was developed
and, by tacit agreement of all coastal states, these extended 3 miles out from the coastline.
The idea of territorial waters was to allow coastal states the right to establish specific controls
on customs, fishing rights and protection of coastal areas but it did not give those states the
right to prevent foreign vessels from passing through their territorial waters. Subsequently,
there was little change in governance of the marine environment until the period post World
War II since which there have been many significant developments in international and
national laws relating to the marine environment. Cincin-Sain and Knecht (1998, page 69)
indicate that one of the main reasons for this new activity was the discovery of major oil and
gas deposits in the Gulf of Mexico leading to the United States (and subsequently a number
of South American countries) setting out claims to hold jurisdiction over resources on the
continental shelf contiguous with their coastlines and, subsequently, to acceptance of national
jurisdiction over ocean zones 200 nautical miles from the coastline.
The UN (1998) indicates that pressure from domestic oil interests led President Truman,
in 1945, to unilaterally declare US jurisdiction over all oil, gas and mineral rights on its
continental shelf, closely followed by Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador (which claimed
sovereign rights to a 200 mile zone in order to protect fish stocks from distant water fishing
1 United Nations (1998). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (An historical perspective).
Originally prepared for the International Year of the Ocean 1998. Pub: Oceans and Law of the Sea: Division
for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Available online at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention
2 Cincin-Sain, B and Knecht, R W (1998). Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management: Concepts and Practices.
Pub: Island Press, US
International Protection of the Marine Environment 53
fleets). Other countries went on to claim a 12 mile territorial sea zone (increasing the distance
from the 3 miles that had previously been common practice). The main purpose for extending
territorial waters was to gain access to rich mineral, oil and fishing resources of the seas and
oceans from being used by other countries which either also bounded the sea in that region
(therefore requiring treaties to agree specific territorial boundaries) or from countries from
further afield. As oil and other companies identified rich mineral, ore and oil deposits, the
financial benefits to a nation on whose continental shelf those resources were identified
become ever more important. Fishing stocks also became an issue of contention as many
nations have deep water fishing fleets which need to travel further and further afield as
fishing stocks decline in one region and so those fleets move on to another region.
Between the 1950s and 1970s there were growing disputes over what countries could
claim to be the limits of their territorial waters and later over the development of the idea of
Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ). An EEZ is a sea zone over which a state has specific
rights to natural resources including fisheries. Table 1 outlines the limits for different areas as
set out under international law. One example of a dispute, and an early conflict over access to
an EEZ arose in the early 1970s between the United Kingdom and Iceland over access to rich
fishing grounds in the North Atlantic. In 1972 Iceland declared an EEZ of 200 nautical miles
in an action which led to the so-called “Cod Wars”, during which the nets of British trawlers
fishing in the region were cut and vessels from the British Navy had to be sent to the area to
protect them. This dispute ended in 1974 following a threat by Iceland to close a NATO base
used by the British Navy. The UK government declared the area off limits to British fishing
vessels from December 1976.
Table 1. Scope of coastal waters by distance from coastline
Zone type Distance from the coastal baseline mean water mark
Internal waters Any waters, including estuaries, inland from baseline
Territorial waters 12 nautical miles offshore from the baseline
Contiguous zone Between 12 and 24 nautical miles from baseline
Exclusive Economic Zone 200 nautical miles from baseline
International waters Waters outside any waters claimed by a country
Note: 1 nautical mile = 2,025.372 yards (1,852 metres) compared to a standard mile which is 1,760
yards (1,609.344 metres). The nautical mile is approximately 15% longer than a standard mile.
In the example of the “Cod War” there is a distance of slightly less than 500 miles
between the furthest north of the Scottish Isles and the southern coastline of Iceland, and so
both countries would have been able to adopt the 200 nautical mile EEZ limit without
overlap. However, in an area such as the North Sea countries are much closer together and,
therefore, there are a number of treaties delimiting the areas which can be claimed as national
waters by the different coastal states. It was thus vital that international rules were put in
place to clearly identify what a state could or could not claim in terms of the seas and oceans
abutting its coastline. Those rules were codified and put in place through the development of
the UN Convention on the Law of the SEA (UNCLOS; also sometimes known as LOS
Convention or LOSC) and discussed in Section 2.1. Section 2 also examines some other UN
level conferences and Conventions which have a direct impact of marine governance. These
include the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE) and the subsequent
54 Angela Carpenter
creation of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), together with the 1992 UN Conference
on Environment and Development (UNCED) and its outputs on Climate Change, Biodiversity
and Agenda 21.
This introduction has provided a brief history of how marine environmental governance
has developed over time, particularly since the end of World War II, and many of the most
significant International Conventions that have been developed to protect the environment
will be considered in more detail in Section 2. However, in order to further illustrate the
complex nature of marine environmental governance, and to provide an example of just some
of the actors involved in one specific issue, Figure 2.1 from Carpenter (20053, page 22) has
been updated and appears as Figure 14.
Carpenter (2005) set out an example of the complex relationship between regulators at
international, regional and national levels and examined some of the many stakeholders
responsible for dealing with, or which were impacted by the issue of marine pollution from
ships in the North Sea region of the European Union (EU).
Regional Government:
Industry/Trade
e.g. European Commission Associations:
(EU Directive 2000/59/EC) ESPO, INTERTANKO, IAPH,
ICS, IOPC 1971 FUND,
DG for Transport IACS, OCIMF, ITOPF
Global:
United Nations
Environmental
EU Member International Maritime Organization Organisations:
States (MARPOL 73/78) ACOPS,
Greenpeace,
160+ Marine Environment Protection Friends of the Earth
signatories = Committee
nation states
Local Groups:
Tourist Boards,
Local Council, National:
Police, Harbour e.g. UK Government Other North Sea Conventions
Boards, Fisheries, and Organisations:
Local Residents Department for Transport North Sea Conferences, Bonn
Agreement, OSPAR Commission,
Shipping & Maritime & North Sea Commission, Paris MOU
Ship
Policy Coastguard inspections
Division Agency
Figure I. Some Participants in North Sea Pollution Prevention (amended from Carpenter, 2005, Figure
2.1, page 22)
3 Carpenter, A (2005). The Reduction of Ship-Generated Waste in the North Sea: A Contemporary Analysis. PhD
Thesis. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.
4 Full details of all the Industry/Trade Associations identified in Figure 1 are available from Carpenter (2005) List
of Abbreviations, Page xi. Available online at:
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecac/COMPLETE%20THESIS.pdf
2. THE ROLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
As discussed in the introduction, the United Nations plays a major role in governing and
protecting the marine environment, through its various committees and conventions. This
section will examine one of the most significant UN Conventions with relevance to the
marine environment - the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) covering the
background and history of the development of that Convention and providing an overview of
the scope of that Convention. It will also examine two of the most significant UN
Conferences of the last few decades and their relevance to the marine environment – the 1972
UN Conference on the Human Environment (UNHCE) and the 1992 UN Conference on the
Environment and Development (UNCED).
2.1. The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Its Development
and Scope
The UNCLOS Convention was adopted on 10 December 1982 at Montego Bay, Jamaica
and entered into force on 16 November 1994. It is the main Convention dealing globally with
issues of protecting the marine environment, the rights of coastal states to maintain
jurisdiction in areas such as customs, fishing and access to mineral and other resources within
their territorial and contiguous waters and EEZs (see Table 1), and also the need to protect the
marine environment from pollution and misuse. However, the process of developing the
Convention took several decades, starting with meetings to convene a UN Conference on the
Law of the Sea until its final entry into force in 1994. This section will look first at
developments which took place at an international level to first establish the need for a
Convention and will then describe some of the main elements of the Convention itself.
2.1.1. Developments Leading to UNCLOS Convention

Between 1949 and 1956 an International Law Commission (ILC) met to discuss the
issues of territorial waters, the high seas and territorial seas with draft articles on the
continental shelf, fisheries and contiguous zones being submitted to the UN General
Assembly fifth session in 1953. A final report on the territorial sea was adopted by the ILC in
1956 and a final draft of the Law of the Sea Convention was agreed at the same time. In
February 1957 the UN General Assembly met and adopted Resolution 1105(XI) which agreed
to convene a UN Conference on the draft convention.
The first UN Conference on the Law of the Sea took place in Geneva, Switzerland,
between 24 February and 27 April 1957. That Conference adopted 4 separate Conventions
and an Optional Protocol which were open for signature by member states between 29 April
and 31 October in 1958. Following on from that, other states and also certain specialized
agencies were invited to become signatories to the Conventions as follows:
Convention on Territorial Sea and The Contiguous Zone (Entered Into Force 10
September 1964):
Part I, Sections I and II, of this Convention set out how the territorial seas of states should
56 Angela Carpenter
be delimited by an individual state and included what constituted the baseline low water line
for making that determination (for example how it should be calculated for straight coastlines,
or for those fringed by islands). It also set out that such a baseline should appear on official
charts produced by the state and outlined how territorial waters should be decided between
adjacent coastal states. What this Convention did not do, however, was to set an actual
distance from the baseline for the limit of such a territorial sea. Part I, Section III, identified
the requirement that states maintain a right of innocent passage for vessels travelling through
territorial seas, while subsections C and D set out rules for government ships and for warships
specifically. Part II of the Convention then outlined what constituted a contiguous zone which
could be up to a further 12 miles out from the boundary to the territorial sea zone of a state.
Convention on the High Seas (Entered Into Force 30 September 1962):

Article 1 of this convention indicates that the high seas are any parts of the sea which are
not part of the internal or territorial seas of a state. Article 2 sets out the right of freedom of
the seas for all states, whether coastal or non-coastal, to have freedom of navigation, to fish,
to lay submarine cables and pipelines and to fly over the high seas. States with no sea coast
are granted access to the high seas under Article 3. The Convention then goes on to set out
specific articles including the right of vessels to fly the flag of, and be registered in, any state,
articles on piracy including seizure of pirate vessels by states, and articles allowing a nations
warships to pursue and board foreign flagged merchant vessels for inspection etc. The
convention also, at Articles 24 and 25, sets out requirements on the prevention of pollution
from vessels, which later forms the basis of the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1973) and its Protocols (1978), known
more commonly as MARPOL 73/78 and discussed in Section 3 of this chapter.
Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas

(Entered into Force 20 March 1966)
This Convention set out the rights and duties of states with respect to fishing and the
exploitation of living resources of the seas, irrespective of whether a state had a coastline
adjacent to the area where, for example, fishing was taking place, or even if they had any
coastline at all. Articles within this Convention include issues such as fishery conservation
and on how states competing for the same fish stocks and other resources should enter
negotiations to reach agreement on conservation (Article 4). Further Articles set out how the
UN should be notified, via the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, if there is a failure to
reach agreement between states, while dispute between States over certain Articles could be
put before a special commission to try and achieve a peaceful resolution of such a dispute.
Convention of the Continental Shelf (Entry into Force 10 June 1964)

This Convention defined, in Article 1, what was meant by the term “continental shelf”
and set out the rights of coastal and other states in areas such as exploration, the laying of
pipelines and cables, exploitation of natural resources, issues of safety zones and access for
scientific research, for example.
Optional Protocol of Signature Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes

(Entry into Force 30 September 1962)
This protocol was open for signature by any state which had already signed one or more
of the Conventions adopted by the UN Conference on the Law of the Sea. Its main purpose
was to set out how disputes over interpretation of the Conventions should be resolved,
whether through the use of an arbitration tribunal or via the International Court of Justice
(ICJ). Where disputes arose between states over the interpretation of the four Conventions
outlined above, and where a settlement of that dispute was not possible, states adopting the
optional protocol were able to take that dispute to the ICJ for settlement. Where states agreed
that there was a dispute between them, a case could go before an arbitration tribunal for
settlement as long as there was agreement (within a 2 month period following notification by
one to the other) that a dispute existed. However, if there was no agreement within 2 months
the dispute would have to be heard by the ICJ. This protocol excluded, however, disputes
arising from specific articles, mainly relating to the conservation of fishing stocks, as set out
in the Convention on Fishing etc.
In addition to the Conventions and optional protocol discussed above, the 1957
Conference also adopted other resolutions including ones relating to nuclear testing and on
pollution of the high seas by radioactive materials, together with various agreements on
fishery conservation and other conservation measures, and on historic waters. It also
convened a second UN Conference and paid tribute to the work of the ILC.
The second Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1960 was convened at the request of the
UN General Assembly to consider issues of what constituted a territorial sea and on fishery
limits, as no agreement had been reached at the first Conference. While the second
Conference, held in Geneva between 17 March and 26 April 1960, did adopt two resolutions
in its Final Act5, it still did not reach a final decision on the breadth of the territorial seas or
on fishery limits, these two issues again being deferred to a future meeting.
The third Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1973 finally led to the creation of
UNCLOS. It was convened in New York and lasted for 9 years until 1982 when the
Convention was adopted. Meetings were held in both New York and Geneva and over 160
states participated in the negotiations. The Convention arising from the third Conference
superseded the four Conventions adopted in 1958 (discussed previously) and established a set
of rules on governance of the oceans and seas. It included the agreement on the maximum
width of territorial seas (12 nautical miles), an issue over which no agreement had been
reached during the first and second Conferences. It also included the concept of 200 nautical
mile EEZs.
2.1.2. Scope of the UNCLOS Convention

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea finally entered into force in November 1994,
following ratification by 60 states, and some 12 years after it was adopted in 1982. In part, the
delay in ratification was due to differences in opinion and interpretation over articles relating
to mineral resources and to governance of the deep seabed. There was a requirement that the
Convention be accepted as a complete package with all aspects being agreed to and no opt-
5 Document A.CONF.19/L.15 of the UN The Text of the Final Act with this reference is available from the United
Nations Diplomatic Conferences Website by following the link at the bottom of the Summary Records,
Annexes and Final Act Index for the Second UN Conference at: http://untreaty.un.org/cod/
diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1960/Vol1-SummaryRecordsAnnexes_and_Final_Act_e.html
58 Angela Carpenter
outs from any of its articles. In order to overcome the disputes which caused the delay in
ratification, an Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of UNCLOS was
produced in December 1982 which overcame most of the remaining differences6. The
Convention itself is made up of 17 Parts containing a total of 320 Articles and has 9 Annexes.
As such it is far too complex to go into specific detail on all aspects of the Convention in this
Chapter. However, some of the key components are described below.
Paragraph 4 of the Preamble to the Convention7 identifies that the main objectives of the
Convention were to create a legal order for the seas, facilitate international communication
and also to promote the peaceful use of the seas and oceans. This would, it was hoped, result
in equitable and efficient use of marine resources, the conservation of living organisms and
the promotion of study, protection and preservation of the marine environment.
Part I sets out the terms and scope and, in particular, outlines what constitutes pollution
of the marine environment, i.e. the introduction of any substances, directly or indirectly, by
man that has a damaging effect on marine life, provides a hazard to human health and which
can damage marine activities such as fishing, and which may impair the quality of sea water
in some way. It also sets out what does and does not constitute dumping of waste at sea.
Parts II to X codify previous conventions with Part II setting out what constitutes the
limits of territorial seas and contiguous zones, the right of innocent passage through territorial
waters and the rules for government vessels and military vessels. Parts III to X include
Articles on: use of Straits for international navigation; Archipelagic States (states made up of
many small islands being seen as a single geographic, political or economic entity); EEZ;
Continental Shelf; High Seas; Regime for Islands; Enclosed or Semi-Enclosed Seas; and the
right of access of land-locked states to and from the sea, including freedom of transit.
Parts XI to XV have been categorised, according to Cincin-Sain and Knecht (1998, page
70), as introducing new concepts, new laws and new institutions in the area of marine
governance. Part XI, Section 2, a set of Principles governing the area, were developed and
emphasize that the oceans and their resources are the common heritage of mankind (Article
136), further noting that the oceans should be used to the benefit of all mankind (Article 140)
and exclusively for peaceful purposes (Article 141). It notes that marine scientific research
should be carried out for peaceful purposes (Article 143) and that all necessary measures
should be taken to protect the marine environment from the harmful effects of any activities
that are undertaken (Article 145).
Part XI, Section 3 sets out policies on how the marine environment should be developed
while Section 4 outlines the different levels of a newly established International Seabed
Authority (ISA) with an associated Assembly, Council and Secretariat. The Assembly is
made up of all members of the ISA – signatories to the Convention are members. It can
establish general policies on any relevant provisions of the Convention falling under its
competency (Article 160). The ISA Council consists for 36 members made up of
representatives from different types of states (Article 161) elected to the Council at Assembly
meetings. Reporting to the Council are an Economic Planning Commission (EPC) and a
6 Full details of the Status of UNCLOS, the Agreement on Part X1 and also the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement
by State or Entity are available from the UN Website. Available online at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/
convention
7 Full Text of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 is accessible via links from the
Contents Page produced by the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, available online at:
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention
Legal and Technical Commission (LTC), both made up of 15 members. A Secretariat, led by
an elected Secretary-General provides support to the various bodies of the ISA, produces an
annual report on its work, and is a conduit for consultations and cooperation with
international and non-governmental organizations. Part XI also covers financial arrangements
of the ISA, legal status, privileges and immunities of the state parties (including how those
rights and privileges may be suspended) and sets out how disputes may be settled.
Part XII deals with protection and preservation of the marine environment, states having
an obligation to protect and preserve that environment (Article 192). While states have a right
to exploit the natural resources of the marine environment, they are also expected to take
measures to prevent, reduce and control pollution, to not transfer damage or hazards from one
area to another, and to minimise the impact of technologies operating in their seas including
preventing activities which may, intentionally or unintentionally, introduce alien species that
could cause significant or harmful changes. In order to ensure that the marine environment
receives the necessary protection, Sections 2 to 11 (Articles 197 to 237) include requirements
in the areas of: technical assistance for developing states; monitoring and environmental
assessment measures; international rules and national legislation to prevent, reduce and
control pollution from sources including land-based or seabed activities, from dumping, and
from vessels or from (or through) the atmosphere; and also enforcement measures for
pollution from the different sources. Specific rules are also set out for ice-covered areas
falling within the limits of a coastal state‟s EEZ (article 234), particularly where climatic
conditions for most of the year cause hazards to navigation and also where pollution could
cause irreversible disturbance of the ecological balance.
Of the remaining 5 parts to the Convention, Parts XIII to XV cover issues around marine
scientific research, the development and transfer of marine technology and the settlement of
disputes, the latter including the obligation that disputes should be settled by peaceful means
and setting out the procedures in place to do so. Parts XVI and XVII set out general and final
provisions including Articles on ratification, entry into force, procedures for amending the
convention and Status of the Conventions. Finally, the Annexes to the Convention provide
additional information on a range of issues including: the establishment of a Commission on
the Limits of the Continental Shelf; basic conditions of prospecting, exploration and
exploitation of mineral resources; conciliation procedures; arbitration procedures; and
participation by international organizations.
Although UNCLOS has now been in force for over 15 years, it is important to note that
with increasing awareness of global issues such as climate change, and increasing scientific
knowledge of the impacts of different chemicals entering the marine environment, as just two
examples, the Convention and the United Nations will play a continuing role in ensuring that
state responses to those issues. As such, regular meetings of all State Parties to UNCLOS are
held annually under Article 319 Paragraph 2(e) at which members of the International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and members of the Commission on the Limits of the
Continental Shelf are elected and reports from the Secretary-General on issues relevant to
parties to UNCLOS are received, among other activities.
It remains vital that states continue to meet both the letter of the convention under its
various requirements, and also meet the spirit of the convention through the promotion of
peaceful uses of the seas and oceans and protecting the marine environment as laid out in the
Preamble to the Convention. The Convention does not stand alone however at the UN level as
other measures have been developed through UN Conferences, the first of which was on the
60 Angela Carpenter
Human Environment (UNCHE) in 1972, leading to the establishment of the UN Environment

Programme (UNEP), and the second of which was the UN Conference on the Environment
and Development (UNCED) in 1992 which resulted in outputs including Agenda 21, the Rio
Declaration and other outputs relevant to governance of the marine environment. These two
Conferences are considered in more detail below.
2.2. The 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE) and the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Cincin-Sain and Knecht (1998, page 73) note that the ocean and coastal issues and the
need for marine environmental protection were emphasized at the 1972 UN Conference on
the Human Environment in Stockholm. That conference, attended by representatives of over
100 nations, was also attended by a range of NGOs campaigning on issues including the
protection of whales and other cetaceans from being hunted by countries such as Japan and
Norway, and also campaigners calling for greater protection of the environment from oil
pollution. Two major events in 1965 and 1969 highlighted the significant damage which can
be caused by oil spills and, with headlines in the press around the world together with
increasing levels of television ownership and access to the broadcast media, the issue of oil
pollution in the marine environment was one that had captured global attention.
In 1965 the vessel Torrey Canyon grounded on Seven Stones Reef between the Scilly
Isles and Lands End in the United Kingdom. The vessel which, at the time of the accident,
had a capacity of 120,000 tons was fully laden with crude oil from the Middle East. Once
aground, vast quantities of oil entered the seas around southern England and spread widely
with the prevailing wind and tides to land on beaches in Cornwall and Devon in the UK and
on beaches in Normandy, France. There was little that could be done to prevent the spread of
the oil, despite vessels spraying chemical dispersants to try and break up the oil slick which it
was estimated measured 35 miles by 20 miles. The vessel remained grounded for 11 days,
starting to break up after 8 days. By day 11 – 29 March 1967 – it was decided that action
should be taken to speed up the sinking of the vessel and so it was bombed by the RAF and
Royal Navy in an attempt to burn off tens of thousands of tons of crude oil. Images of the
grounded vessel, and of the oil fires resulting from the bombing, appeared in newsprint and
broadcast media around the globe.
The Torrey Canyon had been chartered by British Petroleum from a US tanker company
which was a subsidiary of Union Oil Company of California. Coincidentally, another major
oil disaster was associated with Union Oil when, in January 1969, there was a blow-out on
Union Oil‟s Platform A in the Dos Cuadras Offshore Oil Field in the Santa Barbara Channel,
6 miles off the coast of Santa Barbara in California. That blow-out resulted in around 80,000
to 100,000 barrels of oil (equivalent to 13,000 to 16,000 cubic metres of oil) being spilled into
the Santa Barbara Channel over a 10 day period. This spill resulted in the deaths of numerous
sea birds and also animals such as seals and dolphins. It received significant publicity in the
US in particular and resulted in the development of measures to protect the marine
environment of the US over the next several years.
In light of these two major oil pollution incidents in particular, together with growing
awareness of the need to protect the environment as a whole, with the publication of seminal
works by authors such as Rachel Carson (19628) in her book “Silent Spring” and Garrett
Hardin (19689) in his essay “The Tragedy of the Commons”, many of the nations attending
the 1972 UNCHE had prepared national reports setting out the current status of the
environment in those countries.
A significant outcome of the 1972 Conference was the creation of a new UN body, the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) which, with its governing Council, was
given responsibility to co-ordinate the environmental activities across the whole of the United
Nations. UNEP also went on to establish a Regional Seas Programme which promotes sound
environmental management of enclosed or semi-enclosed seas – seas which Article 122 of
UNCLOS defines as being a “gulf, basin or sea surrounded by two or more States and
connected to another sea or ocean by a narrow outlet [through the] territorial seas and [EEZs]
of two or more coastal states” (see footnote 7). At the current time UNEP operates 13
Regional Sea programmes globally, with over 140 countries participating in those schemes10.
Two Conventions directly related to protection of the marine environment also resulted
from the 1972 UNCHE. The first of these was the Convention on the Prevention of Marine
Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (also known as the London Dumping
Convention - LDC), a global convention which entered into force in 1975 and which was
designed to protect the marine environment from human activities resulting in all types of
marine pollution and more than 80 states are currently parties to the convention. The second
convention arising from the 1972 Conference is the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution Ships 1973 (also known as MARPOL) and this Convention, together
with its amendments and protocols (and now known as MARPOL 73/78), is discussed in
more detail in Section 3 of this chapter.
2.2.2. Impacts of 1972 UNCHE and the Need for a New UN Conference on
Environment and Development
The 1972 UNCHE and its outcomes had a positive effect through specific measures to
protect the environment, including the marine environment. However, by the late 1970s and
early 1980s it became clear that environmental degradation was still a significant problem.
There was increasing awareness of links between poverty, illness and social deprivation and
environmental degradation, particularly with the publication of the Brundtland Report
(198711). This report, also known as “Our Common Future”, was named after the Chairman
of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), Gro Harlem
Brundtland, the then Prime Minister of Norway. The Commission was established by the UN
General Assembly in 1983 under Resolution 38/16112. The report of the Commission was
8 Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring. Pub: Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Originally serialised in the New Yorker
Magazine, issues of 16, 23 and 30 June, 1960. More recently this book has been published by Penguin Classics
in a new edition of September 2000 (ISBN-10: 0141184949) and by Mariner Books in 2002 (ISBN: 0-618-
24906-0)
9 Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Essay published in Science, Vol. 162, No. 3859 of 13
December 1968. Full Text available online at: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/162/3859/1243.pdf
10 Further details of the UNEP Regional Sea Programmes can be obtained from the UNEP Regional Seas website.
Available online at:: http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/about/default.asp
11 Brundtland Report (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. UN General
Assembly Resolution 42/197 of 11 December 1987. Full Report available via the Table of Contents. Available
online from UN Documents at: http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
12 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 38/161. Resolution on the “Process and preparation of the
Environmental Perspective to the Year 2000 and Beyond” of 19 December 1983. Available online at:
62 Angela Carpenter
published in December 1987 and was particularly notable in that it examined the need to
protect the environment at the same time as recognising that industrialisation and
development would continue to take place, particularly in “third world” and developing
countries. The report is also famous for its definition on what constitutes Sustainable
Development, where any development undertaken to meet current needs should not
compromise or prevent the needs of future generations from being met13.
In addition to the activities of the Brundtland Commission and the publication of its
report, evidence was being presented – and appearing in the media – highlighting possible
links between emissions of manmade pollutants such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and the
destruction of the ozone layer over Antarctica, and how the use of greenhouse gases (GHGs)
was linked to climate change impacts including the possibility of increasingly severe flooding
in coastal regions. New scientific knowledge, together with increasing public awareness and
concern over how the environment was being used by man, meant that renewed action was
needed to protect the environment as a whole. In addition, there was recognition of the
ongoing threat to both mankind and the environment through the testing of nuclear weapons,
tests which had the potential to cause significant damage to the marine environment and
marine biota (everything living in the marine environment), together with the dumping of
some radioactive wastes at sea.
In the case of nuclear testing, an attempt had been made to prevent this through the
Limited Test Ban Treaty of 196314 which sought to ban nuclear weapons testing in the
atmosphere, outer space and under water, although underground testing was still permissible.
Testing under water and in the atmosphere both had a detrimental effect of the marine
environment and there was also the issue of dumping of radioactive wastes at sea. While the
London Dumping Convention (LDC) 1972 (see Section 2.2) had prohibited dumping of „high
risk‟ nuclear wastes, the definition of what constituted high risk being determined by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Dumping of low risk wastes was still
permissible, with IAEA guidelines becoming a minimum standard to be used in developing
national legislation. However, there was growing opposition among both signatories of the
LDC and from non-governmental organisations which eventually resulted in a moratorium on
dumping of any nuclear waste at sea in 1983.
A number of measures were set in place in preparation for a new Conference on the
environment - the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)
held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, also known as the Earth Summit. Preparatory Committee
meetings, open to any member of the UN, were held in various locations between 1990 and
1992. The Preparatory Committee established three working parties, one of which looked at
environmental issues including those relating to coasts and oceans.
Three Intergovernmental Committees/Panels were also established: the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change;
the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Biological Diversity; and the
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/38/a38r161.htm
13 Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development. Definition at Paragraph 1. Available online
at http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm
14 The Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapons Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water 1963. This
Treaty was signed by the Soviet Union, United Kingdom and United States in Moscow on 5th August 1963,
was open to signature by all nuclear and non-nuclear states at that time, and entered into force on 10th October
1963. Full Text available online at: http://unhq-appspub-01-un.org/UNODA/TreatyStatus.nsf
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Of these the most significant in respect of the
marine environment was the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which was
created in 1989 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and UNEP as a scientific
intergovernmental body to provide independent scientific advice on the issue of climate
change. The IPCC is open to all UN member countries and 194 participating countries in
2010.
UN General Assembly Resolution 45/5315 of December 1988 endorsed the establishment
of the IPCC by the WMO and UNEP (Para. 5) and called for the IPCC to conduct a
comprehensive review of climate change and to provide recommendations on the scientific,
social and economic aspects of climate change including the development of response
strategies which might be included in any future international legislation on climate change.
As a result of this remit, the IPPC played, and continues to play, a significant role particularly
in the areas of climate change but also looking at the potential impacts on low-lying coastal
areas and nations of sea-level rises associated with climate change. For its ongoing work on
climate change, the IPPC received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007
2.3. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992:

Background and Key Outputs:
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development took place between
3rd and 14th June 1992 at Rio de Janeiro in order to build upon the Declaration of the 1972 UN
Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE), Stockholm. Also known more informally
the Earth Summit, the UNCED Conference resulted in outputs on Climate Change, on
Biodiversity and to the document entitled Agenda 21. The Conference was attended by
representatives of 172 nations including 108 Heads of State, together with representatives of
over 2,400 non-governmental organisations and a vast array of the world‟s print and
broadcast media. There were five main outputs from the Rio Conference: the Rio Declaration
on Environment and Development; Agenda 21; the Framework Convention on Climate
Change; the Convention on Biological Diversity; and the set of Forest Principles. The
relevance to the marine environment of the first four of these outputs is discussed below.
2.3.1. Rio Declaration 1992

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 199216 is a non-binding
document which set out 27 principles intended to guide future sustainable development
around the world. The first ten principles are mainly related to the issue of sustainable
development and helping developing countries, acknowledging that all countries have
responsibility for resolving environmental problems, and that any actions must promote a
supporting and open international economic system. While none of the principles make direct
reference to the marine environment, some of the key principles are outlined briefly.
15 UN General Assembly Resolution 45/53 of 6 December 1988. Resolution of the 70th Plenary Session
“Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind”. Available online at
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r053.htm
16 “Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Annex 1” published by the UN
Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Report A/CONF. 151/26 (Vol. 1). Available online at:
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm
64 Angela Carpenter
Principles 10 sets out that that resolution of environmental issues is best handled at a
national level, with public participation and access to information being very important, while
Principle 11 notes that states should enact legislation on environmental standards,
management and priorities within the context of that state, since some countries will be
unable to achieve similar standards without unwarranted economic and social costs. Principle
13 sets out information on liability and compensation issues arising from pollution including
international cooperation. Principle 15 sets out a precautionary approach (sometimes known
as the “Precautionary Principle” which indicates that action should be taken by states when
protecting the environment, even if scientific evidence is not currently available to confirm
the risk of serious or irreversible damage, and that this does not mean that those states can
postpone measures to prevent environmental degradation. Principle 16, sometimes known as
the “Polluter Pays Principle” sets out that the polluter should bear the costs of the pollution
they cause, that this should be in the public interest and that it should not have an impact on
international trade or investment.
2.3.2. Agenda 21 – The United Nations Programme for Action from Rio, 1992
Agenda 21 (199217) was a 40 chapter action plan, which Cincin-Sain and Knecht (1998,
page 80) liken to a “road map pointing the direction towards sustainable development”.
Although non-binding on the part of signatories, there was an assumption that any nation
signing up to the Agenda would take note of its principles. The Preamble to the Action Plan,
paragraph 1.1, noted that “Humanity stands at a defining moment in history … [being faced
with issues of] a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing
deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being”. The Action plan
was set out in four sections: Social and Economic Dimensions (Chapters 1 to 8);
Conservation and Management of Resources for Development (Chapters 9 to 22);
Strengthening the Role of Major Groups (Chapters 23 to 32); and Means of Implementation
(Chapters 33 to 40). It covered areas as diverse as combating poverty (Chapter 3), protection
of the atmosphere (Chapter 9), conservation of biological diversity (Chapter 15), children and
youth in sustainable development (Chapter 25), and promoting education, public awareness
and training (Chapter 36).
A number of Chapters from Agenda 21 specifically relate to the marine environment and
these are described briefly below. However, many other chapters are applicable to the marine
environment in some way. For example, Chapter 15 – Conservation of Biological Diversity –
noted that action should be taken to conserve biological diversity and ecosystems including
marine and aquatic areas (Section A, part (g)) and that surveys should be established to obtain
baseline information on biological and genetic resources including in aquatic, coastal and
marine environments (Section B, part (c )).
Chapter 17 – Protection of the Oceans, all kinds of seas etc. – noted the importance of the
oceans as a “global life support system” (Para 17.1). This chapter set out the need for a range
of approaches in seven sections covering: integrated management and sustainable
development of coastal areas including EEZs; marine environmental protection; sustainable
use and conservation of marine living resources of the high seas (and similarly for resources
17 Agenda 21 – The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio, 1992. Published by the UN Department of
Economic and Social Affairs Division for Sustainable Development. Available online at:
http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/index.shtml
under national jurisdiction); analysing uncertainties for the management of the marine
environment; strengthening international cooperation and coordination, including at a
regional level; and the sustainable development of small islands.
There are many requirements set out in each Chapter of Agenda 21. As an example,
Chapter 17, Section 17.30 set out requirements for states, acting at different levels
(individually, bilaterally, regionally, multilaterally) to protect the marine environment from
degradation caused by shipping (12 activities including cooperation in monitoring vessels for
illegal discharges and enforcing MARPOL discharge provisions (see Section 3.3.3);
promoting safe navigation by adequately charting coasts and shipping routes; and assessing
the need for stricter regulations to reduce the risk of accidents from different types of vessels,
for example). There are also additional sections covering the prevention of dumping,
pollution coming from offshore oil and gas platforms, and pollution from ports through the
provision of facilities in ports to collect oily wastes, chemical wastes and garbage from ships
(again a requirement of the MARPOL Convention)
While Chapters 19 to 22 covered the environmentally sound management of toxic
chemicals, hazardous wastes (including illegal trafficking of toxic wastes), solid wastes and
sewage wastes, and finally radioactive wastes, it is only the last chapter that contains explicit
mention to the marine environment. Chapter 22 – Managing Radioactive Wastes called for
nations to take measures and cooperate in the area of managing these wastes, including a
Code of Practice on trans-boundary movement of those wastes (Para. 22.5(a)). In addition, the
Principle also set out the need for further research on the disposal of low-level radioactive
wastes at sea to determine whether the moratorium in place at that time should be replaced by
a ban (Para. 22.5 (b)). It also notes that radioactive waste should not be stored near sea coasts
or open seas unless evidence is provided to show it does not provide an unacceptable risk to
people and the marine environment (Para 22.5(c)).
Arising from Agenda 21, in 1997 the UN General Assembly adopted a Programme of
Further Implementation of Agenda 2118. Section 36 sets out achievements in the area of
oceans and seas since UNCED. It notes progress in negotiations for agreements and voluntary
instruments in the areas of conservation and management of fishery resources and for the
protection of the marine environment, including progress on the utilisation of fish stocks. It
did, however, highlight that there was still a decline in fish stocks and that levels of marine
pollution were rising, and called for Governments to take action, during the International
Year of the Ocean 1998, to: improve decision making at national, regional and global levels;
to implement Decision 4/15 of the Commission for Sustainable Development (CSD) which
called for periodic review by the CSD of all aspects of the marine environment (as described
in Agenda 21, Chapter 17); and to improve cooperation in assisting developing countries to
implement relevant agreements etc. so that they could fully participate in the sustainable use,
management and conservation of fishery resources and achieve integrated coastal zone
management (ICZM).
2.3.3. The Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992

Page 2 of the Framework Convention 199219 notes that the Parties to the Convention are
18 UN General Assembly (1997). “Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly: S/19-2. Programme for the
Further Implementation of Agenda 21”. UN General Assembly Document A/RES/S-192 of 19 September
1997. Available online at: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/spec/aress19-2.htm
19 Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992. UN Document Ref: FCCC/INFORMAL/84 GE.05(62220(E)
66 Angela Carpenter
aware that the seas and oceans play a role in providing sinks or reservoirs for greenhouse
gases (page 2). In the case of the marine environment, carbon sinks are marine sediments
which can absorb and sequester (remove) greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere in order to help or reduce the global warming effects of those gases. As a result of
the recognition of the marine ecosystem as a carbon sink, Article 4 - Commitments (page 5)
notes that all parties to the Framework Convention must take account of their common
responsibility to (d) promote sustainable management and cooperation in the conservation of
sinks and reservoirs including oceans and coastal marine environments while part (e) sets out
the need for cooperation in preparing for adaptation to impacts of climate change, which
includes developing ICZM plans and also protecting areas affected by flooding. Coastlines of
low lying areas and islands would be particularly threatened by any sea-level rise resulting
from climate change.
2.3.4. Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992

The Convention on Biological Diversity 199220 entered into force on 29 December 1993
and, by June 2000, had 168 signatories. Article 1 of the Convention sets out its aims as being
to conserve biological diversity, sustainably use its components, and equitably share the
benefits of using genetic resources. There is very limited reference to the marine environment
in this Convention. Article 2 indicates that biological diversity covers living organisms from
all sources including marine and other aquatic ecosystems. Article 22, Part 2, indicates that all
contracting parties to the convention should implement it with respect to the marine
environment and consistent with the rights and obligations of those states set out under the
Law of the Sea Convention.
2.3.5. Other Outputs of UNCED 1992:
The UN General Assembly (1995) adopted a Fish Stocks Agreement21 which entered into
force in December 2000. This agreement, which in part was negotiated as a result of
discussions at the Earth Summit, aimed to prevent overfishing and also sought to ensure the
long-term conservation and sustainable use of fish stocks, including highly migratory fish
stocks.
A Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States

(SIDS22) was held in Bridgetown, Barbados between 25 April and 6 May 1994, following
which 111 Governments adopted the Barbados Declaration and Programme of Action which
2000705. Document available from the UN FCCC website. Available online at:
http://unfccc.int/not_assigned/b/items/1417txt.php
20 UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992. Published on the Convention on Biodiversity website. Links to
full text available online at http://www.cbd.int/convention
21 UN General Assembly (1995). “Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea of 19 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of
straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks”. UN Document Ref. A/CONF.164/37 of 8 September
1995. Available online at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention
22 Further details of the Barbados Programme of Action are available from the Conference Website, administered
by the UN Department of Environmental and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development. Available
online at:
http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/dsd_aofw_sids/sids_milemajomeetbpoa.shtml?utm_source=OldRedirect&utm_med
ium=redirect&utm_content=dsd&utm_campaign=OldRedirect
set out strategies that would deal with issues of concern to small island states including:
climate change and sea-level rise; management of wastes; coastal, marine, freshwater and
land resources; biodiversity resources; and human resource development, The Barbados
Conference was considered the first conference to translate Agenda 21 into a programme of
action for a group of countries.
2.4. Summary
This section has provided an historical background and overview of the development of
the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, including precursor conventions. It has also
examined the background to, and outputs from, two major United Nations Conferences, the
first in 1972 on the Human Environment (Stockholm Conference) and the second, in 1992, on
Environment and Development (Rio Conference). Many significant developments have taken
place over the last four decades, partly resulting from the growing demands from nations to
gain economic and other advantages from resources such as oil, precious metals and minerals
found under the sea-beds of coastal waters and continental shelves and to lay claim to fishing
stocks and other marine life in coastal and wider waters. At the same time, growing
knowledge of the environmental impacts of greenhouse gases, the issue of climate change,
and the need to protect fragile environments pushed forward the development of new
international conventions and agreements.
One of the main agencies of the UN responsible for developing and implementing
conventions covering the marine environment is the International Maritime Organization and
the roles and responsibilities of that organization, together with the main conventions
administered by it, are examined in Section 3.
3. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO): HISTORY,

STRUCTURE AND MAIN CONVENTIONS
3.1. History of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization
At the end of a UN Conference held in Geneva between February and March 1948, the
Convention establishing the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO)
was adopted. The name of the organization being changed to IMO in 1982 following entry
into force of the 1975 amendments to the original convention to remove the word
“Consultative” from its title. The aims of IMCO as set out in Article 123 of the original
Convention included: provision of machinery for cooperation between Governments on all
aspects of the international shipping trade; encouraging the adoption of highest practicable
standards for maritime safety and navigation; promoting the international shipping trade; and
removing unfair restrictive practices on shipping. However, the original Convention text
made no mention of marine pollution or of the environment and it was only in 1975 that
Article 1 of the Convention was changed to include the aim of “prevention and control of
23 Convention on the International Maritime Organization. Information on the background to the Convention and
its various Amendments, together with a summary of the main Articles, is available from the IMO website.
Available online at: http://www.imo.org/conventions/mainframe.asp?topic_id=771
68 Angela Carpenter
marine pollution from ships”.

The Convention finally entered into force in March 1959, 12 months after it was accepted
by the 21st state – the terms of entry into force required signature by 21 states, of which 7 had
to have a shipping industry with not less than 1,000,000 gross tonnes. Adoption of the
Convention had been delayed for 11 years, much of the delay being due to some countries
seeing Article 1 as being unacceptable to their national needs. During the 11 years prior to the
adoption of the Convention concern about the marine environment and maritime safety
continued to grow and two Conventions were adopted, the implementation of which was to
become the responsibility of the IMO once it was established. These were the 1954
International Convention for Prevention of Pollution by Oil and the 1948 International
Convention on Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). This latter Convention had originally been
adopted in 1914, following the sinking of the Titanic, and had been subsequently been
amended in 1929 and in 1948. Between entry into force in 1958 and September 2010, the
IMO Convention had been amended 8 times. This was the result of increased membership
necessitating increasing the size of the Council, and also as a result of the need to introduce
new Committees or change the status or make-up of existing Committees, for example.
The IMO is a specialized agency of the United Nations. At June 2010 it had 169 Member
States (Contracting Parties) and three Associate Members24. Member Governments are
responsible for implementing and enforcing global regulations on safety, security and marine
pollution from ships. The United Nations (199825) Review of Maritime Transport notes that
over 80% of world merchandise is carried by sea, amounting to some 8.02 billion tons in
2007 (Executive Summary, page xiii). This includes transport of food, oil, raw materials and
manufactured goods, for example. Maritime transport is of vital importance to the global
economy. The effective governance of that mode of transport - and of the seas and oceans -
particularly in the areas of environment, safety and security, are also vital. The IMO plays a
significant role in ensuring that international standards, Conventions and regulations are
adhered to by member and non-member states.
3.2. Structure of the IMO and its Committees:
The IMO was originally established as having an Assembly, a Council and a Maritime
Safety Committee (MSC), the latter having responsibility for vessel safety including: aids to
navigation; prevention of collisions; handling of dangerous cargoes; and any other matters
relating to maritime safety. At the current time the IMO has an Assembly consisting of all
Member States which meets every two years. At each of those meetings, a Council is elected
by the Assembly and this Council, which is the Executive organ of the IMO, supervises the
work of the organization. The Council is made up of 40 states from three different categories,
and with no duplication between categories. The categories are: 10 states with the largest
interest in providing international shipping services; 10 states with the largest interest in
international seaborne trade; and 20 states with special interest in maritime transport or
24 Full details of IMO Membership can be found via the IMO website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=315
25 United Nations (2008). “Review of Maritime Transport 2008”. Pub. United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development, United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2008. Available online via link at:
http://www.unctad.org/Templates/webflyer.asp?docid=10745&intItemID=4659&lang=1&mode=downloads
navigation. In addition to the Assembly and Council, the IMO also has a Secretariat led by a
Secretary-General and has its offices based in London. The structure of the IMO, including
details of those Member States that are Council Members, is available from the IMO
website26.
Following entry into force in 1959, the IMO Convention was amended several times
between 1964 and 1993 as the number of countries becoming members increased. A number
of additional Committees were also established to assist the work of the IMO. These were:
 Legal Committee - established in 1967 (originally as a sub-committee of the MSC)

and becoming a full committee under the 1975 amendments to the convention.
 Technical Co-operation Committee - established in 1969 and was raised to full
Committee status in 1984 under the 1977 amendments.
 Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) - established under Article
A.358(IX) of the 1975 amendments to the Convention as a subsidiary body of the
IMO to consider environmental issues, and raised to full constitutional status in 1985.
 Facilitation Committee - established in 1972 and was raised to full committee status
under the 1991 amendments.
A brief description of the various IMO Committees and Sub-Committees, together with
their role within the organization, is provided in Table 2.
The Committees and Sub-Committees of the IMO are responsible for updating existing
regulations and the development and adoption of new regulations. IMO Committees and Sub-
Committees are made up of all member states and meetings are open to marine experts from
any member government. They are also open to a diverse range of Non-Governmental and
Inter-Governmental Organizations (currently 78 NGOs and 61 IGOs, the latter including the 9
Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) Organizations discussed in Section 4)27. International
NGOs can gain consultative status with the IMO Council and contribute to the work of its
Committees while IGOs can enter into agreements of co-operation with other IGOs in areas
of common interest, as is the case with the MOUs. The range of IGOs and NGOs include the
International Association of Maritime Universities (IAMU), The International Association of
Ports and Harbors (IAPH), the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the International
Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL).
3.3. The Main Conventions Administered by the IMO
The IMO has responsibility for 29 Conventions and related Protocols under the headings
of Maritime Safety, Marine Pollution, Liability and Compensation, and Other Subjects. A
26 Details of the NGOs and IGOs and their relationships with other organizations can be found via the IMO
website. Available online at:: http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=1639 for relationships;
http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=851 for NGOs which have been granted consultative
status with the IMO; and http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=846 for IGOs which have
concluded agreements of cooperation with the IMO
27 Details of IMO Structure can be found via the IMO website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=312
70 Angela Carpenter
complete list of Conventions is available from the IMO website28, with links to further details
of the individual Conventions also available. A Summary of Status of the various
Conventions is also available and identifies date of entry into force of convention and any
related protocols, the number of Contracting States (signatories to the specific Convention)
and the percentage of world tonnage (world shipping fleet) represented by those states29. For
example, the IMO Convention, which entered into force on 17 March 1958, has 169
Contracting States which represent 97.34% of world shipping tonnage. Details of the
individual states which have acceded to or ratified the various Conventions and Protocols30
are also available.
Table 2. IMO Committees and Sub-Committees
IMO Committees &Sub-

Brief Description and Role
Committees
Highest technical body of IMO which considers a wide range of activities including: aids to
navigation; construction and equipment of vessels; handling dangerous cargoes; and
Maritime Safety Committee
hydrographic information. It considers and submits recommendations and guidelines on
(MSC)
safety to the Assembly. It also adopts amendments to Conventions including SOLAS (see
Section 3.3.2).
Marine Environment Considers any matter concerning prevention and control of pollution from ships, including
Protection Committee adoption and amendment of conventions and other measures to ensure that regulations are
(MEPC) enforced.
Established in 1967 to deal with legal issues following the sinking of the Torrey Canyon –
Legal Committee deals with any legal matters relating to the IMO including legal instruments adopted by the
IMO.
Technical Co-operation Considers any matter concerned with implementation of technical co-operation projects or
Committee in the field of technical co-operation.
Facilitation Committee Concerned with the elimination of unnecessary “red tape” in international shipping.
Sub-Committees which assist with the work of the MEC and MEPC:
Bulk Liquids and Gas (BLG)
Carriage of Dangerous Goods, Solid Cargoes and Containers (DSC)
Fire Protection (FP)
Radio-communications and Search and Rescue (COMSAR)
Sub-Committees
Safety of Navigation (NAV)
Ship Design and Equipment (DE)
Stability and Load Lines and Fishing Vessels Safety (SLF)
Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW)
Flag State Implementation (FSI)
28 A Complete List of Conventions for which the IMO has responsibility is available from the IMO website.
Available online at: http://www.imo.org/About/mainframe.asp?topic_id=260 with links to individual
Conventions being available via a quick link on the left of the IMO homepage at http://www.imo.org/ Hard
copies and other documents are also available from the IMO website publications section and from distributors
worldwide.
29 A Summary of Status of Convention at 30 June 2010, including details of the number of Contracting States and
the % of world tonnage (as measured by Lloyd‟s Register/Fairplay World Fleet Statistics in December 2009)
is available from the IMO website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/Conventions/mainframe.asp?topic_id=247
30 Status of Conventions by Member State at 30 June 2010 is available via the IMO website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/includes/blastDataOnly.asp/data_id=29017/status-x.xls
This section will examine five Conventions out of 29 administered by the IMO (at
September 2010). These Conventions, together with their various Protocols and amendments,
are monitored for compliance under a system of vessel inspections conducted by a number of
regional Memoranda on Port State Control regimes, the scope and main activities of which
are discussed in Section 4 of this chapter.
3.3.1. International Convention on Load Lines 1966 and its Protocol of 1988 (LLC):
The Load Lines Convention was adopted in April 1966 and entered into force in July
1968 and at June 2010 had 159 Contracting States representing 99.04% of world tonnage. A
subsequent Protocol of November 1988 (which entered into force in February 2000) was
adopted in order to bring the LLC certification requirement in line with requirements
contained in the SOLAS and MARPOL Conventions discussed below. An earlier version of
this Convention had been adopted in 1930 but even prior to that there was a long history of
using such marks on vessels over many centuries. For example, the United Kingdom had
introduced a system of lines though a Merchant Shipping Act of 1876 and these lines are
sometimes known as Plimsoll Lines after the British MP of the 1860‟s who developed them.
The LLC was introduced to help ensure the safety of vessels by preventing them from
being over-loaded and to ensure they remained watertight and did not sink if they were
damaged. Highly visible markings are placed amidships on vessels and these provide an
easily visible indication that a vessel is weather and water-tight. Load lines are calculated
based on a principle known as reserve buoyancy (the difference between the volume of a
vessel below the waterline and below the lowest opening which cannot be made watertight).
It takes into account the salinity and temperature of water in different regions to ensure that a
vessel will remain watertight when sailing in those waters. The types of seawater represented
by load lines are: tropical fresh water (TF); fresh water (F); tropical seawater (T); summer
temperate seawater (S); winter temperate seawater (W); and winter North Atlantic (WNA). A
similar system is used for vessels specifically transporting timber.
3.3.2. International Convention on Safety of Life at Sea 1974 and its Protocols of
1978 and 1988 (SOLAS):
The SOLAS Convention was originally adopted in 1914 following the sinking of the
Titanic, which subsequent versions being adopted in 1929, 1948 and 196034. The 1974
Convention entered into force in May 1980 and, at June 2010, had 159 Contracting Parties.
SOLAS 1974, together with its 1978 and 1988 Protocols, was developed specifically so that it
could be kept up to date in light of new technological developments, and uses a system of
“tacit acceptance”. Under this system, any amendments will automatically enter into force by
a specified date unless sufficient objections have been received from an agreed number of
states to prevent this from occurring. Amendments to SOLAS can come from meetings of the
Maritime Safety Committee or following a Conference of Contracting Governments of the
IMO.
34 A summary of the SOLAS Convention is available from the IMO Website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?topic_id=257&doc_id=647
72 Angela Carpenter
Amendments normally come into force in as little as 24 months from the original
proposal being circulated to all Contracting Governments to entry into force. However, this
timeframe can be accelerated to 18 months in exceptional circumstances such as in the
example of a 1988 Amendment of April 1988 which entered into force in October 1989 and
which came about as a result of the sinking of the car ferry Herald of Free Enterprise in
March 1987. In this incident, which resulted in the loss of 193 lives, the car ferry capsized
while leaving its berth in Zeebrugge harbour in Belgium as a result of its cargo loading doors
not being correctly closed. The 1988 Amendment included measures to improve monitoring
of doors and cargo areas to ensure that these were correctly closed and made water-tight and
also for improvements in emergency lighting to aid evacuation of a vessel. Five-yearly
surveys of passenger vessels were also introduced to ensure that such vessels remained stable,
particularly if there had been any change in weight or stability in the intervening period.
SOLAS is designed to ensure the safety of vessels, through a system of certification and
inspection. Vessels are required to meet minimum standards in the areas of construction,
equipment on board and in their operations. Ships are registered to sail under the flag of a
specific state (flag state) but can be inspected by other states if there are grounds to believe
that a ship is not meeting the requirements of SOLAS. Customarily, a state which controls the
territorial waters through which a ship is sailing is known as a Coastal State while a state into
whose port a vessel calls is known as a Port State.
The SOLAS Convention contains articles on general obligations and the amendment
procedure, followed by an Annex which, at September 2010, contained 12 Chapters covering
areas such as General Provisions, Construction and Fire Safety measures, Life-saving
appliances, Radio Communications, Carriage of Cargoes or Dangerous Goods and other
measures necessary to ensure the safety and security of vessels both at sea and in ports. In
total SOLAS has been adapted nearly 40 times through Protocols or amendments between
1978 and 2009. An example of an amendment to SOLAS was the introduction of a new
chapter, Chapter XI, on Special Measures to Enhance Safety, in May 1994. Chapter XI,
which entered into force in January 1996, sets out regulations on vessel surveys and
inspections including those for bulk carriers and tankers under MARPOL 73/78, and also
allows port state control officers to inspect foreign vessels where there are clear grounds to
believe that essential safety measures are not being carried out. Although it notes that port
state control inspections normally only cover the checking of certificates and documents to
ensure they are valid, more detailed inspections can be conducted and certain procedures such
as fire and abandon ship drills or machinery operation may also be examined to ensure that
these are conducted correctly. More recently measures covering Chapter XI were adopted by
a Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security in December 2002 to create Chapters XI – 1
and XI – 2 which deal with improving maritime security at the ship/port interface and for
vessels at sea (including mobile offshore drilling units).
3.3.3. International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 and its
Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/78):
The MARPOL Convention was originally introduced in 1973 and a Protocol was
introduced in 1978. These two elements now make up a main international convention which
covers prevention of pollution of the marine environment from ships, either as a result of
operational activities such as the cleaning out of tanks, or resulting from accidents, and the
Convention also contains regulations aimed specifically at reducing pollution from oil
platforms and drilling rigs. There were 150 contracting states to MARPOL Annexes I and II
by June 2010, representing 99.14% of world tonnage (with smaller numbers for Annexes III
to VI which entered into force between 1988 and 2005, and which are discussed later in this
section).
MARPOL 73/78 was, however, pre-dated by OILPOL, a 1954 Convention which covered
only pollution of the sea by oil through routine tanker operations. OILPOL came about as a
result of increasing complaints about oil spills, particularly in European waters, following
increased demand from Middle East crude oil after World War II. As a result of the delay in
creating IMCO (later IMO and discussed in Section 3.1) the United Kingdom government set
out to develop domestic legislation on oil pollution which would also be acceptable
internationally. In 1954, it sponsored the International Conference on the Pollution of the Sea
which took place in London and which was attended by delegates of 31 countries representing
95% of world shipping. Despite political problems and the United States representatives
being unable to sign an international convention, the OILPOL Convention was finally agreed
and established “prohibited zones” (at least 50 miles from the nearest land) into which oil or
oily mixtures of more than 100 parts per million (ppm) of oil could not be discharged.
Secretariat functions of OILPOL (which was amended in 1962, 1969 and 1971) were dealt
with by the UK Government until finally being transferred to the IMO in 1958, once the IMO
Convention entered into force.
With recognition that most of the vessel-source pollution entering the marine
environment came from operational discharges from ships and not from major accidents,
MARPOL 1973 was adopted, incorporating OILPOL 1954 and its amendments as its Annex
I. In addition, Annexes covering pollution from noxious liquid substances (Annex II),
Harmful Substances in Packaged Form (Annex III), Sewage (Annex IV), Garbage (Annex V)
and most recently Air Pollution (Annex VI) are covered by MARPOL 73/78 with full text of
this Convention appearing in Consolidated Editions of around 500 pages in length35. States
which ratified the MARPOL 73/78 Convention were originally required only to implement
Annex I as technical problems for some states concerning Annex II led to a three year delay
before that Annex became binding. Annexes III, IV and V were made optional annexes and
so that, even through states had to implement Annexes I and II, they were able to opt out of
the three additional Annexes. This resulted in it taking many more years before sufficient
state ratifications had occurred for theose Annexes to enter into force. Annex VI covering air
pollution was developed and entered into force more than 25 years after the original
MARPOL Convention was ratified.
Each Annex contains information on what constitutes the substances covered by it –
summarised in Table 3 (which also provides brief details of Annex history including recent
amendments), information on different types of vessels and standards applicable to them,
certification requirements, how the Annex is to be applied by signatory states, Special Areas
(where discharges may be totally prohibited), exemptions for ships such as military vessels,
and many other requirements. For example, Annex I on Pollution by Oil included 9 Chapters,
26 Regulations and 9 Appendices in the 2002 Consolidated Edition36, amounting to nearly
200 pages in that publication.
35 Consolidation Editions of MARPOL 73/78 have been published in 1991, 1997, 2002 and 2006, as a result of its
continued development. However, since Amendments occur frequently, details are available from the main
IMO website. Available online at: http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?doc_id678&topic-id=258
36 MARPOL 73/78 Consolidated Edition 2002. Pub: IMO, London, 2002.
74 Angela Carpenter
One of the main aims of MARPOL 73/78 is the elimination of intentional pollution of the
marine environment by oil and other substances and to minimise the risk of accidental
pollution. One of its main requirements is that all state parties to the convention should take
action to prevent pollution of the marine environment resulting from ships discharging
harmful substances. Also included within the various MARPOL 73/78 Annexes are
regulations setting out either a requirement that the state parties to each Annex ensure that its‟
ports provide adequate port reception facilities, where applicable, into which wastes can be
discharged and/or a regulation covering Port State Control Inspections which are generally
undertaken by inspectors of the MOU Regimes examined in Section 4.
As noted previously, ships are required to carry valid certificates and normally
inspections will be used to verify their validity (alongside any other inspection criteria for a
particular port or port state). However, more comprehensive inspections can be conducted
under MARPOL 73/78 if there are clear grounds to believe that the ship does not meet the
requirements of those certificates or there are grounds to believe that the ship or its equipment
present a threat of harm to the marine environment if allowed to proceed to sea. Ships may
then be detailed in port until appropriate repairs or remedial action has been taken, or allowed
to travel on to a new port if facilities to undertake those repairs are not available in the port
where the violation of the certificate has been identified. Ships can also be inspected and
detained if there is evidence to suggest that there has been an illegal discharge at sea of
harmful substances such as oil, noxious liquids, or in packaged form which includes freight
containers.
The EU in particular has taken steps to support and strengthen the requirements of
MARPOL 73/78 in European waters through the development of its own legislation on the
provision of reception facilities in ports into which vessels can discharge wastes. The
European Union (2000) put in place a Directive on port reception facilities37 which requires
EU ports to provide facilities to allow ships which normally calling in at those ports to
discharge wastes into appropriate facilities, without causing them any undue delay. Where
ships‟ masters refused to use these facilities, there would then be a case to closely monitor
such a vessel at its next port of call within the EU to check levels of waste on board and to
investigate whether illegal discharges at sea have taken place. Such a refusal would also
provide grounds for much closer inspection of certificates for MARPOL, SOLAS and LL for
example, under the system of port state control inspections required by MARPOL 73/78 and
other IMO Conventions. In part, this EU Directive was developed with the intention of
strengthening the aim of MARPOL 73/78 that intentional pollution of the marine
environment should be eliminated by providing facilities in ports, the availability of which
removed any excuse that waste had to be discharged or dumped at sea as there were no
adequate facilities available to dispose of them on-shore.
37 European Union (2000). Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 27 November 2000
on port reception facilities for ship-generated wastes and cargo residues. Official Journal L332 of 28
December 2000, pp 81-90. Pub: Official Journal of the European Communities. Full text available online at:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0059:EN:HTML
Table 3. Summary of Annex History and Types of Substance covered by Annex

38
Annex Substance
I – Oil Originally entered into force in October 1983 and set limits on the total quantity of oil that can be
discharged by a tanker at sea, how fast that oil can be discharged and that no discharges could take place
within 50 miles of the nearest land. This Annex was revised in 2003 to set a timetable for phasing out of
single-hulled oil tankers (tankers which had the highest likelihood of causing oil spills if their hulls were
breached in some way). It also set new limits on oil tankers carrying different amounts of heavy grade
crude oils. A more recent revision of the Annex in October 2004 designated the Oman Sea area of the
Arabian Seas as a special area where stricter controls are in place on the discharge of oily wastes. This
new area joined the Mediterranean, Baltic, Black Sea and Red Sea areas, together with the Gulfs area,
Gulf of Aden, Antarctic areas and North West European waters. The most recent amendments (July
2009) is aimed at clarifying requirements to facilitate compliance by ships‟ crews and also defines for
the first time what is meant by oil residues and oily bilge water, for example.
II – Noxious Entered into force in April 1987 and set out discharge criteria and measures for a range of noxious liquid
Liquid Substances substances. 250 different substances were evaluated at the time and the discharge of their residues is
in Bulk allowed only into reception facilities in certain concentrations and conditions. No discharges could take
place within 12 miles of the nearest land, with more stringent restrictions covering the Baltic and Black
Sea areas. The Annex was revised in October 2004 to re-categorize what constitutes noxious liquids.
The new categories are: Category X – where discharges are deemed to present a major hazard to marine
resources or human health and so are prohibited from being discharged: Category Y – where discharges
are deemed to present a hazard to marine resources or human health, or cause hard to amenities or other
uses of the sea, so limits on quality and quantity are set; Category Z – present a minor hazard … so less
stringent restrictions; and Other Substances – present no harm … so not subject to the requirements of
this Annex. Some limits are also set dependent on the age of the ship and the technology available on
board.
III – Harmful Entered into force in July 1992 as an optional annex. Includes detailed standards on packing, marking,
Substances labelling, and documentation etc. of packaged goods. The criteria for harmful substances are:
Carried by Sea in bioaccumulated to a significant extent and known to produce a hazard to aquatic life or human health;
Packaged Form bioaccumulated with attendant risk to aquatic organisms or human health for a period of one week or
less; and highly toxic to aquatic life at a specified level of discharge against time.
IV – Sewage Entered into force in September 2003 as an optional Annex and set requirements to control the discharge
of sewage – wastes from toilets etc., medical premises and waste from vessels transporting live animals
- into the marine environment. The Annex was revised in April 2004 to set standards for new ships and
to set limits on sewage discharges at sea. As a result, sewage can only be discharged at sea if: between 3
and 12 nautical miles from land it has been comminuted (shredded or pulverised to reduce the size of
any solid matter) and disinfected; and outside 12 nautical miles it has been stored in holding tanks and is
discharged at a rate specified by standards developed by the IMO and through specified discharge pipes.
Of particular note is a geographical restriction of any discharges at all off the north-eastern coast of
Australia which is aimed at protecting the Great Barrier Reef in that region. An amendment of March
2006 also introduced the regulation on PSC inspections.
V – Garbage Entered into force in December 1988. This Annex covers different types of garbage and how they
should be disposed of and also sets strict limits in special areas – including the north-eastern coast of
Australia, together with the Mediterranean, Baltic, Black, Red and North Seas, the Gulfs area, the
Antarctic area and the Wider Caribbean Region. This Annex covers all vessels and includes a complete
ban on dumping any type of plastic at sea. It also sets limits for disposal of food wastes, paper products,
rags, glass, metal, bottles, packaging materials and other types of garbage at different distances from
land.
VI – Air Pollution The most recent Annex of MARPOL 73/78 is Annex VI on Air Pollution. This was introduced in a
Protocol of 1997 and entered into force in May 2005, and was subsequently revised in October 2008.
This Annex is particularly important in relation to issues of climate change/greenhouse gases and ozone
depleting substances (for example CFCs). It sets out limits on sulphur content in ship‟s fuel to reduce
sulphur oxides (SOx) emissions to air from ships of various types, limits on nitrogen oxides (NOx)
emissions from the engines of various types of ships, and limits on volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from tankers in ports and oil terminals. In addition, it sets even stricter sulphur content in fuel limits
within Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs) covering the Baltic Sea and other sea or port areas
designated by the IMO.
38 More information on the various types of waste is available from the IMO website, following links on the right
hand side of the page. Available online at: http://www.imo.org/home.html
76 Angela Carpenter
3.3.4. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and

Watchkeeping for Seafarers 1978 (STCW):
The STCW Convention originally entered into force in July 1978 with major
amendments taking place in 1995 and 201039. Amendments to STCW are made under the
tacit acceptance procedure, previously discussed at point 3.3.2. STCW 1978 set out minimum
standards on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers (ship‟ crew) such as deck
officers, radio officers, engineers, and it was a requirement that all parties to the Convention
(154 states representing 99.15 % of world tonnage at the end of June 2010) should meet or
exceed those standards. It also set standards for training and qualifications for different ranks
of crew on ships such as oil and chemical tankers, liquefied gas tankers, and cargo vessels
carrying dangerous or hazardous cargoes. STCW 1978 does not cover manning levels on
board ships as this is part of the requirements set down in the SOLAS Convention. A separate
version of STCW specifically designed for fishing vessel personnel, was introduced by the
IMO in 1995.
As with LL, SOLAS and MARPOL, the STCW Convention includes within it measures
to ensure compliance with its requirements to provide appropriate education and training
courses, certification procedures and other measures set out within it. Revisions to Chapter 1
of the Convention, which were adopted in July 1995 set out enhanced procedures to allow
port states to intervene in situations where deficiencies identifies under inspections might
result in danger to persons, property or the environment. These deficiencies include incorrect
crew certification or where there is evidence that the ship has previously been operated in an
unsafe manner.
A major amendment to STCW was adopted in May 2006 and entered into force in
January 2008. In part, this amendment was intended to ensure that ships‟ crew come from a
“White List” of countries, those countries which have fully implemented the requirements of
the Convention. In doing so, ships flying the flag of countries which are not on the list can be
targeted for more rigorous inspection while those countries on the white list can choose not to
employ, on their own flagged vessels, seafarers with certificates issued by non-white list
countries.
Major revisions have been made to STCW following a Conference held in Manila in The
Philippines in June 2010. These revisions, which are due to enter into force in January 2012,
have introduced a number of measures including: improved measures to prevent fraud and
better evaluate certificates of competency among seafarers; requirements relating to onboard
technology, information systems and Dynamic Positioning Systems; and requirements on
security training so that a ship‟s crew are able to deal with attacks by pirates.
Piracy on the High Seas is a problem that has grown over a number of years, particularly
in regions such as the Indian Ocean including significant levels off the Horn of Africa, in the
Malacca Straits and in the South China Sea, in the Red Sea and off the coastlines of some
South American countries. In the case of the Horn of Africa and Gulf of Aden region, there
have been large numbers of attacks on vessels sailing in the area over the last few years and
over 130 attacks in 2008 and over 40 vessels being seized and held for ransom by Somali
Pirates in that year. Recent examples of vessel hijackings include the US owned and flagged
containership MV Maersk Alabama which was hijacked in April 2009 and the German owned
39 A summary of the STCW Convention is available from the IMO Website. Available online at:
http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?doc_id=651&topic_id=257
but Antigua and Barbuda flagged cargo vessel Magellan Star which was hijacked in
September 2010.
3.3.5. Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea

1972 (COLREG):
The COLREG Convention was adopted in October 2972 and entered into force in July
1977. At June 2010 it had 153 Contracting Parties representing 98.36% of world tonnage.
This Convention again uses the tacit acceptance procedure for adopting amendments, either
via voting at the MSC or via special conferences on proposed amendments. The main aim of
COLREG is to prevent collisions at sea, for example through the use of traffic separation
schemes such as the scheme which operates in the Dover Strait, a narrow stretch of water
between England and France which is one of the busiest sea-lanes in the world. At only 21
miles across at its narrowest point, this Strait is used by over 400 commercial vessels each
day travelling through it in both directions, together with large numbers of ferries travelling
between the two countries and a range of shipping and other vessels which operate in coastal
waters.
COLREG is comprised of five sections (Parts A to E) and 38 Rules, together with four
Annexes, the most last of which, Annex IV on Distress Signals, was revised through
amendments of November 2007 and which sets out a range of signals which can be used to
indicate that a vessel is in distress and needs assistance. COLREG rules in Parts A to E
include: measures related to the visibility of vessels at sea including use of lights at different
times and for different types of vessels; the use of look-outs to see (and hear) other vessels
including measures dependent on the level of visibility at the time; measures to ensure that
vessels should travel at a safe speed appropriate to where it is travelling; and what should
happen when a vessel needs to overtake another one or avoid another vessel which is
approaching it head on.
Rule 10, which sets out how vessels should behave in traffic separation schemes, is one
of the Rules which the Paris MOU conducts its inspections. If a request is made by an MOU
Authority that another Authority investigates a vessel for violations of Rule 10 of COLREG,
then inspections which include examination of distress equipment on board can be conducted
and the vessel can be detained until those deficiencies have been resolved.
3.4. Summary
This section has examined the role, structure and main committees of the International
Maritime Organization, the Specialist Agency of the United Nations responsible for many of
the main conventions related to governance of the marine environment. It has also examined
5 of 29 Conventions administered by the various Committees of the IMO in some detail, and
has provided links to additional reading material for the various aspects discussed in this
section. A significant aspect of all international governance measures is the need to ensure
that they are adequately and appropriately implemented, to ensure that they are complied
with, and to have measures in place to take action in the event of non-compliance. Section 4
of this chapter will examine a number of regional regimes – Memoranda of Understanding on
Port State Control (or MOUs) – which have been developed since the early 1980s.
78 Angela Carpenter
4. MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING ON PORT STATE CONTROL

(MOUS) AND MOU REGIMES
MOUs are a series of regional agreements which have a responsibility to ensure
compliance with the requirements of international maritime conventions such as those set out
by the UN and IMO. MOU regimes are agreements between states which aim to enforce the
requirements of the different conventions through the use of vessel inspections, vessel
detention, and by ensuring that any remedial work is carried out at the earliest possible
opportunity to make vessels comply with the conventions.
Port State Control is a system under which foreign flagged vessels entering a port may be
inspected by appointed agencies to ensure that they comply with all relevant international
conventions. Inspections, which should normally cause no undue delay to a vessel, are used to
ensure that all statutory certificates (for the vessel, its equipment and its crew) are available
and are up to date. They can also examine the vessel to ensure that there are no deficiencies
with its structure or equipment that would make it unsafe for it to travel to its next port of call
or identify where there is a risk of the vessel polluting the sea during its normal operations. A
range of selection criteria used to identify which vessels should be inspected, together with
more detail on PSC inspections, is provided in Section 4.2.
A major advantage of the MOU agreements is that, when a foreign flagged vessel enters a
port within its region, and then sails on to other ports in the same region, the MOU regime
can provide a coordinating body to monitor and track a vessel‟s activities. The result of this is
that it helps identify substandard vessels and can also act as a disincentive for intentional
pollution by the vessel‟s crew since there is a high risk that such pollution can be identified
and even a suspicion of it taking place can result in even more thorough inspections while it is
in a MOU region port. It should also help reduce the risk of accidental pollution incidents by
identifying vessel deficiencies. While it is the responsibility of a flag state to ensure that
vessels flying its flag meet all the international standards set out in IMO and other
Conventions, it is often only when a vessel enters a port state and is inspected that
deficiencies are identified and action taken to ensure that these are dealt with.
Between January 1982 and June 2005, nine MOU Regimes were established around the
globe and cover all the world‟s oceans40. An overview of the geographical coverage of the
MOU regimes, in order of their establishment and including details of signatories to the
agreements, appears in Table 4. While the United States is not a signatory to any of the MOU
regimes, it does hold observer status with both the Tokyo and Black Sea MOUs and also
conducts its own port state control activities and inspections under the aegis of the US Coast
Guard41.
40 Additional information is available from the websites of the individual MOU Regimes. The websites are:
Paris MOU - http://www.parismou.org/
Acuerdo de Viña del Mar - http://200.45.69.62/
Tokyo MOU - http://www.tokyo-mou.org
Caribbean MOU - http://www.caribbeanmou.org/
Mediterranean MOU - http://www.medmou.org/
Indian Ocean MOU - http://www.iomou.org/
Abuja MOU - http://www.abujamou.org/
Black Sea MOU - http://www.bsmou.org/
Riyadh MOU - http://riyadhmou.org/
41 Details of United States Coast Guard port state control activities are available online at:
Table 4. Overview of Regional MOU Regimes in chronological order of establishment
MOU MOU Region Signatory Maritime Authorities at July 2010

Regime Date
Europe and Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
Jan North France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta,
Paris MOU
1982 Atlantic Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation,
Region Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom
Acuerdo de Latin
Nov Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Honduras,
Viña del American
1992 Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela
Mar Region
Members: Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Fiji, Hong Kong (China),
Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New
Tokyo Dec Asia-Pacific
Guinea, The Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, Vanuatu,
MOU 1993 Region
Vietnam. Observers: Macao (China), Democratic People‟s Republic of
Korea, Solomon Islands, United States of America
Members: Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada,
Caribbean Feb Caribbean Guyana, Jamaica, the Netherlands Antilles, Suriname and Trinidad &
MOU 1996 Region Tobago. Observers: Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, St. Kitts & Nevis, St.
Vincent & The Grenadines, Turks & Caicos Islands
Mediterran July Mediterrane Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia,
ean MOU 1997 an Region Turkey and the Palestine Authority
Indian Indian Australia, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia (Observer), India, Iran,
June
Ocean Ocean Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Oman, Seychelles, South Africa,
1998
MOU Region Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania and Yemen
West &
Angola, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Cote d‟ Ivoire, Gabon,
Abuja Oct Central
Ghana, Guinea, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria,
MOU 1999 African
Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, The Gambia, and Togo
Region
Black Sea April Black Sea Members: Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey and
MOU 2000 Region Ukraine. Observer: United States Coast Guard
Arabian
Riyadh June United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,
Gulf
MOU 2005 Sultanate of Oman, State of Qatar and State of Kuwait
Region
NOTE: The date in column 2 is the month and year when the MOU was initially finalised, although the
agreements have been amended and additional states have signed up to them at later dates.
In the case of the Tokyo MOU, one of the main seafaring states that had not signed a
memorandum of understanding at September 2010 to become a member of that body, and
which also does not hold observer status, is Taiwan. In 2003 Taiwan established its own PSC
inspection regime, with appropriately trained and certified inspectors in each of its major
international ports. Inspectors will normally have held a senior rank (e.g. Master Mariner,
Chief Engineer), or have held a lower rank but worked on vessels which operate
internationally. As this example illustrates, it is not necessary that a state signatory to
international conventions and required to undertake PSC inspections should also be a member
of an MOU regime.
Many international conventions contain a requirement that PSC inspections are carried
out on foreign flagged vessels to ensure both vessel and crew safety, and to help reduce the
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/pscweb/index.htm
80 Angela Carpenter
risk of intentional and accidental marine pollution. The first five conventions which appear in
Table 5, together with their amendments and Protocols, have been examined in Section 3.3.
Four further IMO Conventions requiring inspections are identified in Section 2, Relevant
Instruments, of the Paris MOU Agreement42. These are summarised below:
 TONNAGE 1969 was originally introduced as a universal tonnage measurement

system. It provides gross and net tonnages for cargo vessels by calculating the
volume of all enclosed spaces on a ship (gross tonnage) and the volume of all cargo
spaces of a ship (net tonnage), with gross tonnage being used to calculate manning
levels, safety rules and port fees, for example.
 CLC 1969 sets out how compensation is to be paid for damage caused by oil spills
from ships which carry more than 2,000 tons of oil as cargo, with most other vessels
not being covered by the Convention. Its subsequent Protocols and Amendments
mainly set out the monetary value of compensation, including compensation for
environmental damage and the cost of reinstating contaminated environments. It
makes a ship‟s owners liable for any damage caused and also requires them to
maintain adequate levels of insurance equivalent to the monetary value of the loss of
the ship and its cargo.
 AFS 2001 is concerned with prohibiting the use of anti-fouling paints on ships. These
paints are particularly hazardous to the marine environment, with many containing
harmful chemicals such as organotin compounds - organic compounds based on tin
such as tributylin (TBT) which can be sprayed on ship‟s hulls to control the growth
of barnacles, algae and other organisms. Chemicals such as TBTs can leach into the
marine environment and can be extremely toxic to marine life. Only 45 states had
ratified AFS 2001 by June 2010 out of 169 Contracting States to the IMO
Convention.
 BUNKERS 2001 is modelled on CLC 1969. It covers vessels not included under that
convention and aims to ensure that adequate, prompt and effective compensation is
available for damage to a state‟s territorial seas or EEZ as a result of oil spills from
ships‟ bunkers (or fuel tanks). The owners of ships over 1,000 gross tonnage are
required to have mandatory insurance to cover the costs of any pollution incidents.
The final convention appearing in Table 5 is a convention of the International Labour

Organisation (ILO), the UN specialized agency which seeks to promote social justice and
internationally recognised human and labour rights. ILO Convention C147 of 197643 and its
Protocol of 1996 set out to ensure the safety of seafarers, particularly those working on
substandard vessels and which are registered under flags of convenience. It is applicable to
the vast majority of sea-going vessels, with limited exclusions including sailing vessels,
fishing and whaling vessels and some other small vessels. It requires those states which have
ratified the Convention to have in place regulations or laws for ships that are registered in that
state, and sets out that those regulations or laws should cover aspects such as safety standards,
42
Relevant Instruments list available from the Paris MOU website. Available online at:
http://www.parismou.org/ParisMOU/Organisation/About+Us/Instruments/default.aspx
43
Convention C147 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention 1976 of the International Labour
Organization. Full text available online at: http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C147
hours of working, and the provision of adequate social security for crew members. ILO C147
is open for ratification by states which are also parties to SOLAS, LL and COLREG.
In the case of vessel inspections conducted under the aegis of the Paris MOU, specific
Appendices of ILO C147 are identified as requiring vessel inspections and these sections are:
 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138);

 Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936 (No. 58);
 Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920 (No. 7);
 Medical Examination (Seafarers) Convention, 1946 (No. 73);
 Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134, Articles 4 and 7);
 Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92);
 Food and Catering (Ships‟ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68, Article 5); and
 Officers Competency Certificates Convention, 1936 (No. 53, Articles 3 and 4).
The Paris MOU also has a responsibility to ensure vessel compliance with a range of EU
Directives and Regulations in the area of Marine Safety. Examples of these measures include:
 Directive on requirements for vessels carrying dangerous of polluting goods

(93/75/EEC and amendments)
 Directive on common rules and standards for ship inspection (94/57/EC and
amendments)
 Directive on Port State Control (95/21/EC and amendments)
 Directive on safe loading and unloading of bulk carriers (2001/96/EC)
 Segregated ballast oil tankers: tonnage measurements (Regulation (EC) No. 2978/94)
 Safety management of ro-ro passenger vessels (Regulation (EC) No. 3051/95 as
amended)
 Directive on mandatory surveys of ro-ro ferry etc. (1999/35/EEC and amendments)
 Directive on marine equipment (96/98/EC and amendments)
 Directive on safety rules and standards for passenger ships (98/18/EC and
amendments)
 Directive on registration of persons sailing on board passenger ships etc. (98/41/EC
and amendments)
 Directive on port reception for ship-generated waste and cargo residues etc.
(2000/59/EC) – previously discussed in Section 3.3.3.
Similarly, signatories to the Mediterranean MOU and Black Sea MOU that are also EU
Member States will also have to ensure compliance with relevant EU Directives which may
be applicable to the whole of the EU or for a specific region such as the Mediterranean. In the
case of other MOU regimes such as Tokyo MOU, Caribbean MOU, there will similarly be a
range of regional agreements, treaties or regulations for which port state control inspections
will be required and which will be conducted by the inspectors for that regime.
82 Angela Carpenter
4.2. Ensuring Compliance through Vessel Inspection
In order to ensure that vessels comply with the requirements of the various Conventions
and other legal instruments, a system of vessel inspections is in place for each MOU Regime.
Each MOU regime sets out a minimum number of vessels to be inspected each year. In the
case of the Paris MOU, this is 25% of the estimated number of foreign flagged merchant
ships entering a member state‟s ports. The level of vessel inspections differs widely between
the different MOU regimes, with the Tokyo MOU indicating that it will endeavour to inspect
80% of the total number of ships operating within its region each year (both foreign flagged
and MOU member flagged vessels), while the Indian Ocean and Riyadh MOUs specify 10%.
Of the other MOUs, Viña del Mar specifies 20% and the Mediterranean, Abuja and Black Sea
regimes specify 15%.
Vessel inspections are conducted by recognised organisations or private bodies which are
able to carry out surveys and issue or verify Certificates such as those required under SOLAS,
MARPOL etc. discussed previously. In the example of the Paris MOU, inspections in the
United Kingdom are conducted by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency while in Sweden
they are conducted by the Swedish Maritime Authority. In the example of the Tokyo MOU
region, inspections in China are conducted by its Maritime Safety Authority. The case of
Taiwan with its own PSC inspection system separate from the Tokyo MOU has been
discussed previously.
Vessels are selected for inspection under a set of criteria which are normally set out in the
text of the MOU. The Paris MOU provides a comprehensive list of criteria and target factors
for selecting vessels for inspection and the full list is available in the MOU Text (200944,
Annex 1, Section 1, page 2) and there is a degree of similarity between the various MOU
regimes. Table 6 sets out the most common selection criteria for identifying vessels for
inspection but excludes the Caribbean and Black Sea MOUs for which this information is
unavailable.
The use of selection criteria such as those set out in Table 6 have the advantage of
reducing the opportunity for vessel owners or captains to claim that they have been unfairly
targeted in a port or region.
Vessels can be inspected in a port and may be detained for rectification of any
deficiencies identified during those inspections and where the vessel is deemed unsafe to
travel on to its next port of call. Vessels with more minor deficiencies may be allowed to
proceed but will be given a deadline by which any repairs should be undertaken and can then
be inspected once that deadline has elapsed and the next time it enters a member state‟s port,
to ensure that work has been undertaken. The Paris MOU provides details of its Port State
Control inspection procedures45 which identifies as a minimum requirement the examination
of some 46 different certificates (as they apply to the type of vessel being inspected), and
these include certificates covering safety equipment and radio equipment, showing that the
vessel is in compliance with the requirements of SOLAS, and has an International Ship
44
Paris Memorandum on Port State Control (2009). Full Text of the Paris MOU, including its 31st Amendment,
adopted 21 May 2009 (effective date: 1 July 2009) is available online at: http://www.parismou.org/ParisMOU/
Organisation/Memorandum+of+Understanding/xp/menu.3945/default.aspx
45
Paris MOU – Port State control inspection procedures. Available online at: http://www.parismou.org/ParisMOU/
Organisation/About+Us/Inspection/xp/menu.4424/default.aspxhttp://www.parismou.org/ParisMOU/Organisati
on/About+Us/Inspection/xp/menu.4424/default.aspx
Security Certificate, a Minimum Safe Manning Document and Medical Certificates.

Additionally, inspections will examine the vessel to check its engine room, crew
accommodation and other areas to ensure they meet the standards set out in the relevant
certificates.
Table 5. International Conventions against which ships may be inspected for compliance
Main International Conventions for Compliance Inspection
Mediterranean
Indian Ocean
Viña del Mar
Caribbean
Black Sea
Riyadh
Tokyo
Abuja
Paris
MOU Regime
Load Lines (LL 1966) / / / / / / / / /
Load Lines 1988 Protocol / / / / / / /
Safety of Life at Sea 1974 (SOLAS 1974) / / / / / / / / /
Safety of Life at Sea 1974, Protocol of 1978 / / / / / / / /
Safety of Life at Sea Protocol of 1988 / / / / / / /
Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, and Protocol of 1978 / / / / / / / / /
(MARPOL 73/78)
Standards of Training, Certification and Watch Keeping for / / / / / / / / /
Seafarers 1978 (STCW 1978)
Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREG / / / / / / / / /
197272)
Tonnage Measurement of Ships 1969 (TONNAGE 1969) / / / / / / /
Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Conv.1976 (ILO / / / / / / / /
147) and Protocol of 1996
Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1992 (CLC 1992) / /
Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships 2001 (AFS / / /
2001)
Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage 2001 / /
(BUNKERS 2001)
NOTE: Blank cells indicate where Memorandum of Understanding does not explicitly state that all
amendments and protocols to the relevant instruments will be adhered to
Deficiencies against which vessels can be detained include: lack of necessary certificates
or out of date certificates on board; structural problems with the vessel including corrosion or
cracks in the vessels hull; deficiencies in equipment such as fire suppression systems or
damaged cargo hatches which may affect the vessel‟s buoyancy in the event of bad weather
(as outlined in the LLC discussed in Section 3.3.1); out of date equipment; and the failure to
adequately undertake operational drills such as fire drills or abandon ship drills where an
inspector witnessing those drills sees that the crew does not understand what they should do.
As noted in Section 3, when looking at the number of states which have ratified the
various IMO (and ILO) Conventions and the coverage of those states in terms of world
shipping fleet tonnage, the vast majority of vessels entering ports should already be adhering
to the terms of those conventions.
84 Angela Carpenter
Table 6. Main Selection Criteria and Target Factors for Vessel

Inspections by MOU Region
MOU Region
Mediterranean
Indian Ocean
Viña del Mar
Most common selection criteria set out in MOU
documents for selection of vessels for inspection.
Riyadh
Tokyo
Inspections should take place where the vessel:
Abuja
Paris
has been reported by pilots or the Port Authority as having
1 / / / / /
deficiencies prejudicial to safe navigation
is carrying dangerous or polluting goods where all relevant
information (e.g. ships particulars, movements, types of 2 / / / / /
Selection dangerous goods) have not been fully provided
Criteria for is subject of a report/notification by another Authority 3 / /
Inspections is subject of a report or complaint by the master, a crewman
or other relevant persons unless any such report has been 4 / /
deemed to be unfounded
has been suspended or withdrawn from its class for safety
6 / / / /
reasons in the last 6 months
has not visited port in a member state of an Agreement
within last 12 months, or where data on the vessel is not 1 / / / /
available from regional database
has not been inspected by any Authority within the last 6
Target months (which can be less if there are clear grounds for 2 / / / / / /
Factor for inspection)
conducting has statutory certificates on construction and equipment that
inspections have been issued by an organisation not recognised by the
3 / / /
MOU authority (or not issued in accordance with relevant
instruments)
has been permitted to leave port with deficiencies under
5 / / / / /
certain conditions*
Despite measures taken over many years, there are still a small minority of vessels, some
sailing under flags of convenience but also some sailing under the flags of countries that have
ratified conventions, that continue to hold invalid or out of date certificates, that fail to meet
the required standards for their crewmen, and that have significant deficiencies with either the
vessel itself of the equipment on board. To illustrate this, three examples of deficiencies
identified by Paris MOU inspections in the first 9 months of 2010 are outlined below:
 Vessel 1: Panama-registered Chemical Tanker – 15 deficiencies of which 9 resulted

in 4 days detention. Included operational deficiencies with MARPOL, lifeboats not
ready to use, problems with fire safety equipment, electrical equipment, radar, and
out of date charts
 Vessel 2: German-registered Passenger Ship – 17 deficiencies, 8 of which resulted in
9 days detention. Included a range of fire safety issues, problems with life-saving
appliances, out of date charts, and a lack of emergency lighting
 Vessel 3: Bulgarian-registered Bulk Carrier – 17 deficiencies, 7 of which resulted in
9 days detention. Included life saving appliances, load lines issues, abandon ship
drill, structural safety with corroded beams and floors, missing documentation.
Approximately 70 ships were also banned from entering the region‟s ports in September
2010. These vessels sailed under the flags of countries around the world including Turkey,
Cambodia, Sierra Leone, Panama, Nigeria, Tonga and the Russian Federation. All of these
vessels had either failed to call into a specified repair yard, had multiple detentions which had
not been adequately dealt with, had invalid certificates or had previously jumped detention.
4.3. Summary
This section has set out how a system of vessel inspections (PSC) and inspection regimes
(MOUs) play a key role in helping to ensure that a range of international conventions are
correctly adhered to by vessels sailing all around the globe. However, despite this, there is
evidence that substandard ships continue to operate around the globe and to enter the ports of
MOU regime member states. However, even for those vessels which fully adhere to all the
relevant legislation, hold all the correct certificates and are fully up to standard in terms of the
vessel, its equipment and its crew, it is important to understand that once a vessel sails into
international waters, or outside specific limits set for certain types of pollution, such as the
example of sewage from ships set out in Annex IV of MARPOL (see Table 3), then are still
able to discharge wastes into the marine environment, should they choose to do so.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Recalling my opening comment that that the oceans have long been subject to the
doctrine of Freedom of the Seas, the freedom to travel the worlds seas and oceans does not
bring with it a freedom to pollute those same seas and oceans. What I hope to have illustrated
throughout this chapter is the very complex nature of trying to govern the marine environment
and protect it from intentional and accidental pollution.
Marine pollution is trans-boundary in nature and protecting the marine environment is a
multi-level, multi-agency and multi-stakeholder responsibility. International protection and
governance of the marine environment takes place at many levels – internationally by the
United Nations and the International Maritime Organization; regionally, for example, through
measures adopted by the European Union; nationally and even at smaller geographical scales.
Many agencies of the UN, the EU and other regional actors, together with national
governments and their agents, work alongside environmental and other NGOs and industry
actors in attempting to put in place and enforce measures to limit environmental damage as a
result of both accidental and intentional activities from ships, drilling platforms and land-
based sources of pollution.
It is clear that protecting the marine environment is a very complex subject and this
chapter does not attempt to cover it is in its entirety or in great depth. Instead, its aim is to
provide the reader with a broad overview of some the key players in the regulation of that
environment and also one of the major actors – the network of regional Memoranda of
86 Angela Carpenter
Understanding – which plays a significant role in enforcing those regulations, at least in the
territorial and coastal waters of member states. Further out to sea, it takes actions such as
aerial or satellite surveillance, the use of coastguard or military vessel patrols, and other types
of measures to attempt to monitor the marine environment to try and prevent pollution from
taking place. The seas and oceans cover around two-thirds of the earth‟s surface in an
environment which is crucial to maintaining life on the planet. As such, any actions that can
further increase or improve protection of that environment must be accorded all the support
and help possible.
A very large body of additional information on the UN, IMO and MOU Regimes is
available through their various online resources. As far as possible, this chapter has set out to
provide the most up to date information and website details available, so that the reader can
look further into the very complex inter-relationship between different agencies and actors,
conventions and regulations, should they wish to do so.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brundtland Report (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development. UN General Assembly Resolution 42/197 of 11 December 1987. Full
Report available via the Table of Contents. Available online from UN Documents at:
http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
Carpenter, A, 2005. The Reduction of Ship-Generated Waste in the North Sea: A
Contemporary Analysis. PhD Thesis. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.
Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring. Pub: Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Originally serialised in the
New Yorker Magazine issues of 16, 23 and 30 June, 1960. More recently this book has
been published by Penguin Classics in a new edition of September 2000 (ISBN-10:
0141184949) and by Mariner Books in 2002 (ISBN: 0-618-24906-0)
Cincin-Sain, B and Knecht, R W (1998). Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management:
Concepts and Practices. Pub: Island Press, US
Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Essay published in Science, Vol. 162, No.
3859 of 13 December 1968. Full Text available online at:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/162/3859/1243.pdf
IMO (2002). MARPOL 73/78 Consolidated Edition 2002. Pub: IMO, London, 2002.
United Nations (1998). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A historical
perspective). Originally prepared for the International Year of the Ocean 1998. Pub:
Oceans and Law of the Sea: Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.
Available online at:
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention
View publication stats

Carpenter From The Marine Environment-FP1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carpenter From The Marine Environment-FP1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

International Protection of the Marine Environment

Chapter · February 2011

Ship-source pollution and environmental crime View project

PEGASEAS Project View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1. INTRODUCTION – A BRIEF HISTORY OF GOVERNANCE

Table 1. Scope of coastal waters by distance from coastline

2. THE ROLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

2.1.1. Developments Leading to UNCLOS Convention

Convention on the High Seas (Entered Into Force 30 September 1962):

Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas

Convention of the Continental Shelf (Entry into Force 10 June 1964)

Optional Protocol of Signature Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes

2.1.2. Scope of the UNCLOS Convention

Human Environment (UNCHE) in 1972, leading to the establishment of the UN Environment

2.3. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992:

2.3.1. Rio Declaration 1992

2.3.3. The Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992

2.3.4. Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992

2.3.5. Other Outputs of UNCED 1992:

A Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States

3. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO): HISTORY,

marine pollution from ships”.

3.2. Structure of the IMO and its Committees:

 Legal Committee - established in 1967 (originally as a sub-committee of the MSC)

3.3. The Main Conventions Administered by the IMO

Table 2. IMO Committees and Sub-Committees

IMO Committees &Sub-

Table 3. Summary of Annex History and Types of Substance covered by Annex

3.3.4. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and

3.3.5. Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea

4. MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING ON PORT STATE CONTROL

Table 4. Overview of Regional MOU Regimes in chronological order of establishment

MOU MOU Region Signatory Maritime Authorities at July 2010

 TONNAGE 1969 was originally introduced as a universal tonnage measurement

The final convention appearing in Table 5 is a convention of the International Labour

 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138);

 Directive on requirements for vessels carrying dangerous of polluting goods

4.2. Ensuring Compliance through Vessel Inspection

Security Certificate, a Minimum Safe Manning Document and Medical Certificates.

Main International Conventions for Compliance Inspection

Table 6. Main Selection Criteria and Target Factors for Vessel

 Vessel 1: Panama-registered Chemical Tanker – 15 deficiencies of which 9 resulted

View publication stats

You might also like