Threats and Challenges
The threats and challenges of today’s world,
globalisation, terrorism and the drive for profit, bring
specific problems to seafarers.
 Flags
of convenience
Regulations of the International Maritime Organisation
require all ships to fly the flag of the country in which
they are registered. Countries of registration are referred
to as “flag states”. Flag states are responsible for
regulating areas such as the physical state of the ship;
working conditions of the seafarers; and activities of ship
owners.
Registering a ship in a country that is not the owner’s
own is known as “flagging out”. The United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part VII, Section 1,
Article 91, states that
There must exist a genuine link between the State and the
ship.
However each country is also entitled to define what is
meant by a “genuine link”. Certain small countries can
profit by allowing foreign ships to register. Their flag
regulations may be less than demanding. They may be
unwilling or unable to enforce international maritime
regulations on the ships which fly their flags. These flags
have become known as “Flags of Convenience” or FOCs.
This statement from the ITF Flags of Convenience Campaign
Report 1998/9 summarises the problems:
FOCs enable shipowners to minimise their operational
costs by, inter alia, tax avoidance, transfer pricing, trade
union avoidance, recruitment of non-domiciled seafarers and
passport holders on very low wages, non-payment of welfare
and social security contributions for their crews and
avoidance of strictly applied safety and environmental
standards.
Ship arrests
When a ship enters a port in any country, the Captain may
be obliged to allow inspectors from the national maritime
authority to come onboard. If the inspectors feel that the
ship does not meet international health and safety
regulations, they can put it under arrest. The ship may not
leave the port until the situation is rectified. In these
circumstances, unscrupulous owners, protected by anonymity,
refuse to take responsibility and abandon their ships.
For the seafarers, abandonment in port is a disaster.
Without money to pay the costs of returning home, they find
themselves detained in countries where they have no rights
to work or receive welfare benefits. They may have to rely
on welfare organisations, such as AOS, for food and support,
sometimes for months at a time. There are also cases of
individual seafarers being abandoned in port because they
are ill or have complained about conditions. Again, welfare
organisations are their only source of support.
Security threats
In 2002, the International Maritime Organisation adopted
new measures in response to global terrorism. The
International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS
Code) was developed with the intention of ensuring the
security of ships and ports. It brought in stringent
controls on movement in ports. In certain countries the Code
has been over-rigidly applied resulting in seafarers being
denied shore-leave, contrary to IMO guidelines.
For welfare organisations, the over-rigid application of
the ISPS Code makes ship visiting more difficult. For
seafarers who may not have come ashore for several weeks, it
can seem like a prison sentence. A report by the influential
International Commission on Shipping (ICONS) concluded that
such denial of shore leave is demeaning to the seafaring
profession and does nothing to reduce the risk of terrorism.
The report observes:
There is a substantial logical inconsistency in
preventing a mariner on a tanker, for example, from access
to shore leave on security grounds whilst at the same time
engaging in operations with highly dangerous cargo using the
same personnel.
 Safety
at sea
Container ship M/S Repubblica di Genova capsized in the
port of Antwerp in March 2007. Fortunately all 42 crew
members and technicians escaped unhurt. The ecumenical
chaplaincy team in the port were onhand to offer practical
and emotional support.
Assisting those in distress at sea is an ancient
tradition among seafarers. It is also an obligation under
international law. The United Nations Law of the Sea
stipulates that states must ensure that all ships flying
their flags meet their obligations to those in distress. In
addition, coastal states must provide search and rescue
services and, if necessary, co-operate with neighbouring
states to assist those in distress at sea
The International Maritime Organisation provides the
legal instruments to enforce these obligations. These
instruments include the SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea)
Convention adopted in 1974 and the SAR (Search and Rescue)
Convention adopted 1979.
The safety of undocumented migrants and refugees at sea
is a matter of great concern. Poor and desperate migrants
may attempt to cross the sea in inadequate boats and at
great danger to themselves. Some manage to board merchant or
fishing ships and travel as “stowaways”. In the event of
shipwreck or disaster at sea, the rights of such people are
not always respected.
In 2001 the United Nations passed resolution A.920(22)
regarding the obligation to assist those in distress at sea.
They requested the International Maritime Organisation to
review the appropriate legal instruments and remove any
ambiguity. The resulting amendments to SOLAS and SARS came
into force in July 2006. Two statements encapsulate the
ethical humanitarian principle of assisting those in
distress at sea.
“This obligation to provide assistance applies regardless
of nationality or status of such persons or the
circumstances in which they are found”. Amendments to SOLAS, chapter V
“In an age when ships’ captains are constantly asked to
improve efficiency and cut costs, it remains vital that they
continue to rescue those found in grave peril on the sea –
whoever they are and whatever their reason for being there.” Statement on IMO website
Stowaways
Stowaways are unofficial passengers who board ships
illegally, usually without the knowledge of the crew. While
hiding onboard, they may endure terrifying conditions
without adequate food and water or access to sanitation.
There are numerous instances of stowaways suffocating in
containers. Discovery can provoke anger and hostility among
the crew: the ship is their home and they may consider
stowaways as intruders. In addition some crews have
insufficient provisions for themselves and may be unable to
feed their unexpected passengers.
There are further problems when the ship arrives at its
destination port. If a stowaway is caught leaving the ship,
the port state authorities may accuse the seafarers of
trafficking illegal immigrants. This offence carries severe
penalties in many countries. Conversely, port state
authorities may refuse to allow stowaways to come ashore
obliging ships to depart with them still onboard. There are
disturbing stories of stowaways disappearing on the high
seas, presumably thrown overboard.
Criminalisation of seafarers
Accidents can happen anywhere. At sea, the consequences
can be disastrous: deaths of crew or passengers; loss of
ships or cargo worth millions of dollars; or pollution of
seas and coastlines. Sometimes accidents occur because
seafarers fail to follow international safety procedures,
perhaps under pressure to maximise profits. Equally,
accidents can occur due to mistakes or unfortunate
circumstances beyond anyone’s control.
Increasingly seafarers are being held personally
responsible for accidents and arrested and imprisoned. In
many cases, they are held by foreign jurisdictions where
they have few connections, little knowledge of legal
procedure and may not speak the local language.
In 2005 a Joint Working Group of the International
Maritime Organisation and International Labour Organisation
issued a resolution expressing serious concern for seafarers
given the increasing use of criminal proceedings after a
maritime accident. The Working Group calls for detention of
seafarers to be as brief as possible and has issued
guidelines for the agencies involved including port state
authorities, flag states, the seafarers’ own states and ship
owners.
|