The IMO Instruments Implementation Code (aka III Code or IIIC) is 

the key instrument

behind the IMO Member State Audit Scheme. It provides a Code that all Member States are
audited against to assess capability and resources to satisfy international obligations in
terms of Port State, Coastal State and Flag State

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is responsible to implement and amend

different codes as per types of ships, goods or cargoes, Cargo operation, maritime security,
shipbuilding, the safety of the crew, training etc. Failure to comply with such Codes renders
any shipboard operation to legal liabilities.
The 5 important instruments of IMO are:
 Conventions.
 Protocols.
 Amendments.
 Recommendations, codes, and guidelines.
 Resolutions.

What is ship code?

Ship-to codes are used for postal and delivery addresses. Ship-to codes derive their
address lines from the Location code; therefore, for every ship-to address, there is a
Location address.

Implementation, Control and Coordination:

IMO was established to adopt legislation and Governments are responsible for implementing
them.  When a Government accepts an IMO Convention it agrees to make it part of its own
national law and to enforce it just like any other law. The problem is that some countries lack
the expertise, experience and resources necessary to do this properly.
 
There is a demonstrated statistical evidence, when analysing the casualty rates or the port
State control detentions of the ships in relation with their respective flags, that a highly
significant difference exists between the performances of States with a substantial and
organized maritime safety Administration, manned with experienced ship surveyors, and
other ones that are not in a position to properly fulfil the different tasks and responsibilities of
the flag State in relation with safety certification of ships.
 
IMO is concerned about this problem and in 1992 set up a special Sub-Committee on Flag
State Implementation (FSI) to improve the performance of Governments. The FSI Sub-
Committee was renamed the Sub-Committee on Implementation of IMO Instruments (III) in
2013.
The III Sub-Committee works under the following terms of reference:
 
1    Under the direct instructions of the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine
Environment Protection Committee, the Sub-Committee on Implementation of IMO
Instruments (III), in addressing the effective and consistent global implementation and
enforcement of IMO instruments concerning maritime safety and security and the protection
of the marine environment, will consider technical and operational matters related to the
following subjects, including the development of any necessary amendments to relevant
conventions and other mandatory and non-mandatory instruments, as well as the
preparation of new mandatory and non-mandatory instruments, guidelines and
recommendations, for consideration by the Committees, as appropriate:
 
.1    comprehensive review of the rights and obligations of States emanating from the IMO
treaty instruments;
 
.2    assessment, monitoring and review of the current level of implementation of IMO
instruments by States in their capacity as flag, port and coastal States and countries training
and certifying officers and crews, with a view to identifying areas where States may have
difficulties in fully implementing them;
 
.3    identification of the reasons for the difficulties in implementing provisions of relevant
IMO instruments, taking into account any relevant information collected through, inter alia,
the assessment of performance, the investigation of marine casualties and incidents and the
port State control (PSC) data, while paying particular attention to the perceived difficulties
faced by developing countries;
 
.4    consideration of proposals to assist States in implementing and complying with IMO
instruments by the development of appropriate mandatory and non-mandatory instruments,
guidelines and recommendations for the consideration by the Committees, as appropriate;
 
.5    analyses of investigations reports into marine casualties and incidents and maintaining
an efficient and comprehensive knowledge-based mechanism to support the identification of
trends and the IMO rule-making process;
 
.6    review of IMO standards on maritime safety and security and the protection of the
marine environment, to maintain an updated and harmonized guidance on survey and
certification related requirements; and
 
.7    promotion of global harmonization of PSC activities.
 
2    The conventions and other mandatory instruments (as may be amended from time to
time) referred to above include, but are not limited to:
 
.1    1974 SOLAS Convention (chapters I, IX, XI-1 and appendix and other relevant chapters,
as appropriate) and the 1978 and 1988 Protocols relating thereto;
 
.2    MARPOL, BWM and AFS Conventions and other related environmental instruments, as
appropriate;
 
.3    International Safety Management (ISM) Code;
 
.4    Code for recognized organizations (RO Code);
 
.5    IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III Code); and
 
.6    Casualty Investigation Code, 2008.
 
3    The non-mandatory instruments referred to in paragraph 1, which the Sub-Committee
may be called upon to review, include, but are not limited to:
 
.1    HSSC Guidelines; (Harmonized System of Survey and Certification)
 (Which ships are required to have HSSC?
Certificates

 Passenger Ship Safety Certificate, including Record of Equipment.

 Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate.
 Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate, including Record of Equipment.
 Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate, including Record of Equipment.
 Cargo Ship Safety Certificate, including Record of Equipment.)

.2    Procedures for Port State Control; and

 
.3    fair treatment of seafarers, non-convention ship-related matter, etc.
 
4    Any other relevant technical and operational issues referred to it by the Committees or
other technical bodies of the Organization.
 
Port State Control

Another way of raising standards is through port State control. Many IMO conventions
contain provisions for Governments to inspect foreign ships that visit their ports to ensure
that they meet IMO standards. If they do not they can be detained until repairs are carried
out.
 
These inspections were originally intended to be a back up to flag State implementation, but
experience has shown that they can be extremely effective. The Organization adopted
resolution A.682(17) on Regional co-operation in the control of ships and discharges
promoting the conclusion of regional agreements. Memoranda of understanding
(MoUs)/agreements have been signed covering Europe and the North Atlantic (Paris MoU);
Asia and the Pacific (Tokyo MoU); Latin America (Acuerdo de Viña del Mar); Caribbean
(Caribbean MoU); West and Central Africa (Abuja MoU); the Black Sea region (Black Sea
MoU); the Mediterranean (Mediterranean MoU); the Indian Ocean (Indian Ocean MoU) and
the Persian Gulf (Riyadh MoU).
 
IMO also has an extensive technical co-operation programme which concentrates on
improving the ability of developing countries to help themselves. It concentrates on
developing human resources through maritime training and similar activities.

Implementation of Instruments Support

Under the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
and IMO conventions, such as SOLAS 1974, MARPOL, STCW 1978, TONNAGE 1969, LL
1966/1988, COLREG 1972, AFS 2001, BWM 2004 etc., Administrations are responsible for
promulgating laws and regulations and for taking all other steps which may be necessary to
give these instruments full and complete effect so as to ensure that, from the point of view of
safety of life at sea and protection of the marine environment, a ship is fit for the service for
which it is intended.

While States may realize certain benefits by becoming Parties to instruments aiming at
promoting maritime safety and the prevention of pollution from ships, these desired benefits
can only be obtained when all Parties concerned fully carry out their obligations as required
by the conventions, and the ultimate effectiveness of any convention depends, inter alia,
upon all States:

1. becoming Party to all instruments related to maritime safety, security and pollution
prevention and control;
2. implementing them widely and effectively;
3. enforcing them rigorously; and
4. reporting to the Organization, as required.

Administrations should improve the adequacy of the measures which are taken to give effect
to those conventions and protocols to which they are Parties and ensure that they are
effectively monitored. Improvement can be made through rigorous and more effective
application and enforcement of national legislation.

Some States encounter difficulties in fully implementing IMO instruments. Reasons for these
difficulties include shortage of finances and qualified personnel, lack of technical expertise,
absence of oversight of delegation of authority etc. In this respect, IMO has an extensive
technical cooperation programme which concentrates on the self-sustainable development
of beneficiary countries. It focuses on capacity building through maritime training and similar
activities. 

Sub-Committee on Implementation of IMO Instruments (III Sub-

Committee)
IMO set up a special Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI) in 1992 to improve
the performance of Governments. The FSI Sub-Committee was renamed the Sub-
Committee on Implementation of IMO Instruments (III) in 2013.

The III Sub-Committee works under the following terms of reference:

 1    Under the direct instructions of the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine
Environment Protection Committee, the Sub-Committee on Implementation of IMO
Instruments (III), in addressing the effective and consistent global implementation and
enforcement of IMO instruments concerning maritime safety and security and the protection
of the marine environment, will consider technical and operational matters related to the
following subjects, including the development of any necessary amendments to relevant
conventions and other mandatory and non-mandatory instruments, as well as the
preparation of new mandatory and non-mandatory instruments, guidelines and
recommendations, for consideration by the Committees, as appropriate:

  comprehensive review of the rights and obligations of States emanating from the
IMO treaty instruments;
  assessment, monitoring and review of the current level of implementation of IMO
instruments by States in their capacity as flag, port and coastal States and countries
training and certifying officers and crews, with a view to identifying areas where
States may have difficulties in fully implementing them;
 identification of the reasons for the difficulties in implementing provisions of relevant
IMO instruments, taking into account any relevant information collected through, inter
alia, the assessment of performance, the investigation of marine casualties and
incidents and the port State control (PSC) data, while paying particular attention to
the perceived difficulties faced by developing countries;
 consideration of proposals to assist States in implementing and complying with IMO
instruments by the development of appropriate mandatory and non-mandatory
instruments, guidelines and recommendations for the consideration by the
Committees, as appropriate;
 analyses of investigation reports into marine casualties and incidents and maintaining
an efficient and comprehensive knowledge-based mechanism to support the
identification of trends and the IMO rule-making process;
 review of IMO standards on maritime safety and security and the protection of the
marine environment, to maintain an updated and harmonized guidance on survey-
and certification-related requirements; and
 promotion of global harmonization of PSC activities.
2    The conventions and other mandatory instruments (as may be amended from time to
time) referred to above include, but are not limited to:

 1974 SOLAS Convention (chapters I, IX, XI-1 and appendix and other relevant
chapters, as appropriate) and the 1978 and 1988 Protocols relating thereto; 
 MARPOL, BWM and AFS Conventions and other related environmental instruments,
as appropriate; 
 International Safety Management (ISM) Code; 
 Code for recognized organizations (RO Code); 
 IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III Code); and 
 Casualty Investigation Code, 2008.

3    The non-mandatory instruments referred to in paragraph 1, which the Sub-Committee

may be called upon to review, include, but are not limited to:

 HSSC Guidelines; 
 Procedures for Port State Control; and
  fair treatment of seafarers, non-convention ship-related matter, etc.

4    Any other relevant technical and operational issues referred to it by the Committees or
other technical bodies of the Organization.

Performance Monitoring, Assessment, and Control

To promote and assist Member States in improving their capabilities and performance as
flag States, coast States and port States and in giving full and complete effect to the
instruments to which they are Parties, IMO develops a lot of supporting measures or tools,
such as, historically, Interim Guidelines to assist flag States (resolution A.740(18)) in 1993,
Guidelines to assist flag States in the implementation of IMO instruments (resolution
A.847(20)) in 1997, Self-assessment of flag State performance (resolution A.881(21) in
1999, Self-assessment of flag State performance (resolution A.912(22)) in 2001, Voluntary
IMO Member State Audit Scheme (VIMSAS) in 2003 and Code for the implementation of
mandatory IMO instruments (resolution A.973(24)) in 2005.

The mandatory audit of all Member States (IMSAS) commenced on 1 January 2016, with the
aim of determining the extent to which they give full and complete effect to their obligations
and responsibilities contained in a number of IMO treaty instruments. As criteria for audit,
IMO adopted IMO Instruments Inplemention Code (III Code) (A.1070(28)).

Another way of monitoring the performance of flag States and fighting against sub-standard
shipping is through port State control. Many IMO conventions contain provisions for
Governments to inspect foreign ships that visit their ports to ensure that they meet IMO
standards contained in instruments to which the port State is a Party to, taking into account
the concept of no-more favourable treatment. If they do not, they can be delayed or detained
until repairs are carried out and be subject to targeting. 

These inspections are intended to be a backup to flag State implementation, a “second line
of defence” against substandard shipping, and experience has shown that they can be
extremely effective. The Organization adopted resolution A.682(17) on Regional co-
operation in the control of ships and discharges promoting the conclusion of regional
agreements. 

Most IMO instruments contain provisions related to reporting requirements, in particular,

towards the Organization. In order to promote and facilitate the implementation of mandatory
IMO instruments, the effective use of information and communication technology and
enhance the rate of notification, while potentially reducing the administrative burden for the
Contracting Governments, IMO adopted Notification and circulation through the Global
Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS)  (resolution A.1074(28)). It establishes that
notification through GISIS should be considered as one effective way for Contracting
Governments or Parties to IMO instruments to fulfil their reporting obligations under the
various mandatory IMO instruments. Their level of compliance is taken into account in the
context of the IMO Member State Audit Scheme (IMSAS), which is a strong incentive to fulfil
these requirements.

Further support to the implementation of IMO instruments provides the continuous updating of the
list of non-mandatory instruments, reporting requirements together with the facilities available, and
certificates and documents to be carried on board ships.