The issue of flag state responsibility is often a bone of contention between
proponents and opponents of the open registry system. Open flag states assert that
it is their prerogative as a matter of national policy and priority to choose the kind of
registry works best for them where there are economic interests at stake.
Opponents of open flags contend that many of them do not meet their obligations
under international laws to ensure the safety of their ships and protect the marine
environment. Open flag states, of course, are interested in increasing their fleet sizes
and earning revenue from ship registration fees. To advance economically, some
open registries cut corners leading to substandard shipping. Obviously, that is not
desirable for the good and prosperity of world shipping. By the same token,
substandard ships do no accrue to the benefit of irresponsible ship owners and
operators. A tarnished reputation may potentially result in owners and operators of
such ships not being able to secure cargo, or obtain mortgage financing or insurance.
The consequences of a single disastrous incident attributable to the substandard
condition of a ship may destroy a flag’s reputation irreversibly. On the other hand,
there are many flag states that uphold the highest standards of safety, security and
environmental protection together with adequate attention to crew safety and security even if they are open registries according to the prevailing norms that value
superficial factors more than substantive truth. Such flags, needless to say, are
unjustifiably plagued by the stigma attached to the expression “flag of convenience”.
A new proposition is advanced that is somewhat radical. It is unlikely that it will
materialize given the well-entrenched phenomena of ship nationality and registration, and the concept of the flag and the flag state in international maritime law and
practice. In closing, it is simply submitted that the ultimate objective of the world
shipping community is to make ships safe and secure and to protect and preserve the
marine environment; and to that end, eliminate substandard ships. Regardless of how
outrageous a proposed solution may sound, if it is feasible and functional, it should
be pursued.
References
Books and Articles
Ademuni-Odeki (1998) Bareboat Charter (Ship) registration. Kluwer Law International, The Hague
Bassiouni MC (1996) The sources and content of international criminal law: a theoretical framework. In: Bassiouni MC (ed) International criminal law. Transnational Publishers, Ardsley
Brownlie I (1998) Principles of public international law, 5th edn. University of Oxford Press,
Oxford
Churchill RR, Lowe AV (1999) The law of the sea, 3rd edn. Juris Publishing, Manchester
Coles R, Ready N (eds) (2002) Ship registration law and practice. Lloyd’s of London Press, London
Colombos GJ (1967) International law of the sea, 6th edn. Longmans, London, p 285. quoting
Westlake International Law - 2nd Edition, Vol. I
Eriksson P, Mejia M (2000) IMO’s work on the human element in maritime safety. Lund University
Centre for Risk Analysis and Management, Lund
Ship Nationality, Flag States and the Eradication of Substandard Ships:. . .
605
proponents and opponents of the open registry system. Open flag states assert that
it is their prerogative as a matter of national policy and priority to choose the kind of
registry works best for them where there are economic interests at stake.
Opponents of open flags contend that many of them do not meet their obligations
under international laws to ensure the safety of their ships and protect the marine
environment. Open flag states, of course, are interested in increasing their fleet sizes
and earning revenue from ship registration fees. To advance economically, some
open registries cut corners leading to substandard shipping. Obviously, that is not
desirable for the good and prosperity of world shipping. By the same token,
substandard ships do no accrue to the benefit of irresponsible ship owners and
operators. A tarnished reputation may potentially result in owners and operators of
such ships not being able to secure cargo, or obtain mortgage financing or insurance.
The consequences of a single disastrous incident attributable to the substandard
condition of a ship may destroy a flag’s reputation irreversibly. On the other hand,
there are many flag states that uphold the highest standards of safety, security and
environmental protection together with adequate attention to crew safety and security even if they are open registries according to the prevailing norms that value
superficial factors more than substantive truth. Such flags, needless to say, are
unjustifiably plagued by the stigma attached to the expression “flag of convenience”.
A new proposition is advanced that is somewhat radical. It is unlikely that it will
materialize given the well-entrenched phenomena of ship nationality and registration, and the concept of the flag and the flag state in international maritime law and
practice. In closing, it is simply submitted that the ultimate objective of the world
shipping community is to make ships safe and secure and to protect and preserve the
marine environment; and to that end, eliminate substandard ships. Regardless of how
outrageous a proposed solution may sound, if it is feasible and functional, it should
be pursued.
References
Books and Articles
Ademuni-Odeki (1998) Bareboat Charter (Ship) registration. Kluwer Law International, The Hague
Bassiouni MC (1996) The sources and content of international criminal law: a theoretical framework. In: Bassiouni MC (ed) International criminal law. Transnational Publishers, Ardsley
Brownlie I (1998) Principles of public international law, 5th edn. University of Oxford Press,
Oxford
Churchill RR, Lowe AV (1999) The law of the sea, 3rd edn. Juris Publishing, Manchester
Coles R, Ready N (eds) (2002) Ship registration law and practice. Lloyd’s of London Press, London
Colombos GJ (1967) International law of the sea, 6th edn. Longmans, London, p 285. quoting
Westlake International Law - 2nd Edition, Vol. I
Eriksson P, Mejia M (2000) IMO’s work on the human element in maritime safety. Lund University
Centre for Risk Analysis and Management, Lund
Ship Nationality, Flag States and the Eradication of Substandard Ships:. . .
605