The key role for maritime supervision envisaged in the new integrated maritime policy of the European Union is safety at sea and maritime border control of the continent. The member states’ authorities responsible for maritime supervision work across several policies, including fisheries control, pollution response, maritime safety and security, border control et al. Effectiveness of those actions often suffers form differences between their respective legal systems and administrative command structures. Today, the most intensive efforts go into setting up legal and technical frameworks of cooperation between authorities. The Author argues that integrated maritime policy underscores the significance of the maritime sector in the economic panorama of the EU.
The article describes structure of the Convention on the Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic (FAL 1965), mechanisms of facilitation, and discusses Polish perspectives on the relationship between the Convention and European law. FAL aims to facilitate and expedite international maritime traffic and to prevent unnecessary delays to ships and to persons and property on board. The Convention reduces the number of documents required for entry and departure from port to 9. The European Union, in cooperation with the International Maritime Organization, intends to digitalize ship arrival and departure notifications. The author argues that IMO Resolution FAL 8(32), in force since 2006, and the IMO Resolution FAL 10(35), in force since 2010, are of auxiliary nature and as such do not require Polish ratification procedures. They do bind, however, by way of tacit acceptance.
International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the ISM Code) has been adopted in light of increased number of accidents occurring due to human element. This article reviews the allocation of safety duties between the crew and the shipowner with respect to implementation of safety procedures and shaping general safety culture. The author discusses both parties’ perspectives on effectiveness of ISM implementation, in particular on excessive bureaucracy.
The article analyses maritime cabotage, which is part of the European Union Law since 1992 (Council Regulation [EEC] No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States) and discusses the European Court of Justice case law on the subject. Poland is currently the only large member state with access to sea (over 500 km of coastline with numerous small ports and harbours) that does not have legal regulation on maritime cabotage in force. The author argues for introducing a reservation regarding ships flying non-EU flag.
In the mid-1980s the French and British scientists warned of adverse effects of tin paint used in hull coating on marine environment. The International Convention on he Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships (AFS 2001) entered into force in 2008. At present there are 56 states parties to the Convention, which represent almost 80% of total shipping tonnage. Poland has ratified the AFS Convention in 2004. The European Union has implemented it in 2008.
The article presents reviews of the European Union regulation on reporting formalities for ships entering the EU ports. It also analyses IMO regulation concerning that matter. Finally, the author exposes the differences between both legal systems and weaknesses of the solutions adopted. In the second part of the article the author discusses the Polish way of the reporting formalities system’s implementation. On the basis of a legal analysis as well as practice of the maritime authorities in Poland, the author finds that the Polish regulations seem to be exemplary.
Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks came into force on 14th April 2015 and has been ratified by now by over 40 states across the world (among them Australia, China, India, South Africa and most of the EU countries). The convention provides legal framework for action taken by the Coastal States aiming at removal of wrecks posing danger or impediment to navigation, as well as to the marine environment, or damage to the coastline or related interests of one or more States. The Convention fills the existing legal gap by enabling the States to remove wrecks beyond their territories (as well as within if States decide so). Beside the existing international regulations like Intervention Convention or UNCLOS, the Nairobi Convention clarifies the Costal State’s rights to remove wrecks from its EEZ if they pose a danger for safe navigation or marine environment. The Convention corresponds with mentioned conventions but also equips Coastal States with new legal instruments to deal with hazardous wrecks beyond their territory. The aim of the paper is to analyse the new rights and duties of states, as well as scope of the notion of navigational and environmental threats causes by wrecks. It will refer also to regulatory problems faced by the states implementing the Convention. Even if the Convention is to be applied to territorial sea, its multiple provisions are not. Moreover, the Convention leaves many important aspects unregulated. Those issues will be analysed from the perspective of a country which has not yet ratified the Convention, and will be confronted with the experience from other jurisdictions.