demonstrating competence and criteria for evaluating competence. The amendment
focused on verifiable, detailed and explicit competence and enhanced control procedures. It defined specific responsibilities for flag States and companies employing
seafarers as well as administrations issuing and recognizing certificates. It further
required the implementation of a Quality Standards System, the use of simulators for
specific competences, better mechanisms for the mitigation of fraudulent certification and addressed the qualifications for trainers, assessors and examiners. In a bid to
make Parties more accountable to each other, they were also required to send
information regarding their compliance with the Convention to the IMO, pursuant
to which a panel of “competent persons” would review the information for evidence
that the Parties were giving “full and complete effect” to the Convention.
37
The 1995 amendments entered into force on 01 February 1997 with a transition
period up to 01 February 2002. Following the amendments of 1995, yet still more
gaps were found, this time in light of industry changes and technological advances.
38
An international conference in Manila, The Philippines, in 2010 considered draft
amendments to the Convention and made changes to incorporate mechanisms aimed
at the reduction of fraudulent practices, the establishment of common medical
standards, and the rationalization of revalidation and training in modern technology
including Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) and emerging
engineering concepts. Training requirements for electro-technical officers and able
seafarers (deck and engine) were included and leadership and teamwork competence
requirements enhanced. The distinction between safety and security training requirements were made clearer, the possibility of using modern training methods like
distance and web-based learning recognized and mechanisms introduced for the
avoidance of alcohol and substance abuse. The 2010 Manila amendments entered
into force in 2012 with a transition period up to 01 January 2017.
This non-exhaustive treatment of the amendments from 1995 to 2010 indicates
how comprehensively the global maritime community has sought to address the
education and training of seafarers in international law, primarily through the agency
of the IMO. Other amendments since 2010 include:
37 Under Regulations I/7 and I/8 of the convention. Evidence of a positive independent evaluation
submitted by a Party would put that Party on a list disseminated by circular from the Maritime
Safety Committee (MSC) of the IMO. Revisions of MSC.1/Circ.1164 gives “information related to
reports of independent evaluation submitted by Parties to the International Convention on Standards
of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended, confirmed
by the Maritime Safety Committee to have communicated information which demonstrates that
Parties are giving full and complete effect to the relevant provisions of the Convention”—the
so-called “White List”.
An example of this circular (revision 18) can be found at http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/
HumanElement/Documents/MSC.1-CIRC.1164-REV.18.pdf.
38 In 2006, the IMO Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW) Subcommittee of the MSC
stated that “A comprehensive review of the STCW Convention and STCW Code is needed, in order
to ensure that the Convention meets the new challenges facing the shipping industry, including but
not limited to, rapid technological advances today and in years to come”.
The Evolution of Seafarer Education and Training in International Law
481
focused on verifiable, detailed and explicit competence and enhanced control procedures. It defined specific responsibilities for flag States and companies employing
seafarers as well as administrations issuing and recognizing certificates. It further
required the implementation of a Quality Standards System, the use of simulators for
specific competences, better mechanisms for the mitigation of fraudulent certification and addressed the qualifications for trainers, assessors and examiners. In a bid to
make Parties more accountable to each other, they were also required to send
information regarding their compliance with the Convention to the IMO, pursuant
to which a panel of “competent persons” would review the information for evidence
that the Parties were giving “full and complete effect” to the Convention.
37
The 1995 amendments entered into force on 01 February 1997 with a transition
period up to 01 February 2002. Following the amendments of 1995, yet still more
gaps were found, this time in light of industry changes and technological advances.
38
An international conference in Manila, The Philippines, in 2010 considered draft
amendments to the Convention and made changes to incorporate mechanisms aimed
at the reduction of fraudulent practices, the establishment of common medical
standards, and the rationalization of revalidation and training in modern technology
including Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) and emerging
engineering concepts. Training requirements for electro-technical officers and able
seafarers (deck and engine) were included and leadership and teamwork competence
requirements enhanced. The distinction between safety and security training requirements were made clearer, the possibility of using modern training methods like
distance and web-based learning recognized and mechanisms introduced for the
avoidance of alcohol and substance abuse. The 2010 Manila amendments entered
into force in 2012 with a transition period up to 01 January 2017.
This non-exhaustive treatment of the amendments from 1995 to 2010 indicates
how comprehensively the global maritime community has sought to address the
education and training of seafarers in international law, primarily through the agency
of the IMO. Other amendments since 2010 include:
37 Under Regulations I/7 and I/8 of the convention. Evidence of a positive independent evaluation
submitted by a Party would put that Party on a list disseminated by circular from the Maritime
Safety Committee (MSC) of the IMO. Revisions of MSC.1/Circ.1164 gives “information related to
reports of independent evaluation submitted by Parties to the International Convention on Standards
of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended, confirmed
by the Maritime Safety Committee to have communicated information which demonstrates that
Parties are giving full and complete effect to the relevant provisions of the Convention”—the
so-called “White List”.
An example of this circular (revision 18) can be found at http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/
HumanElement/Documents/MSC.1-CIRC.1164-REV.18.pdf.
38 In 2006, the IMO Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW) Subcommittee of the MSC
stated that “A comprehensive review of the STCW Convention and STCW Code is needed, in order
to ensure that the Convention meets the new challenges facing the shipping industry, including but
not limited to, rapid technological advances today and in years to come”.
The Evolution of Seafarer Education and Training in International Law
481