THE International Maritime Organization may have its detractors, but few can disagree that when governments do manage to effectively enforce internationally agreed measures it can only be a good thing for the industry.
Addressing precisely this issue last week, IMO secretary-general Efthimios Mitropoulos issued a not so subtle reminder to member governments on the importance of their casualty investigation duties.
With the MSC Napoli investigation back on the regulatory agenda and still in the media spotlight, it is perhaps understandable to see why some administrations might shy away from such intense scrutiny.
They are, of course, wrong. The value of these probes and their reports cannot be overemphasised. If conducted properly, such investigations offer a vital protection against future disasters and must be pursued with that goal in mind.
It is heartening that reports of the quality exhibited by the UK’s Marine Accident Investigation Branch do find an eager audience at the IMO, but it is worrying that such reports are often the exception rather than the norm.
Reports have been slowly improving according to those assessing such things, but too often they do not include vital pieces of information needed to make accurate assessments.
The IMO’s new Casualty Investigation Code is a welcome addition to the plethora of sensible rules and regulations, but ultimately it is down to individual governments.
Comments (1)
Comment by
Captain Doctor Ivica Tijardovic
- Thursday 12 June 2008
IT is nice when we hear from the international community that mariners' rights shall at all times be upheld, but from practice we know that is not always the case. The amendment to the Solas Convention requiring a flag state investigation following a casualty is an improvement to safety, but some countries may have some objections. You are absolutely right when you say that properly conducted investigations offer a vital protection against future disasters. The shipbuilding industry is more busy than ever, so some may doubt the construction quality of some new ships. I hope for the day when a captain won’t be blamed for poor ship construction. The quality of casualty investigations definitely depends on who is doing the investigation. They should have basic knowledge in seamanship and naval architecture, and of course practical advice would be more than welcome. The final reports should be short, clear, easy to understand and useful.
Post your comment
Comments are limited to 2000 characters and will be approved before display.
Recent activity
- Shipping's blight
- It's time the price of oil...
- Waiting for bed time
- Crunch time for box lines
- Cancelled out
- Look who's talking
- Cosco lashes out at ore...
- Land of Lay-Up
- Onward to Rotterdam
- Leave FFAs to grow
- Right ambition
- Banks still not tested
- Too crowded
- Let in the light
- Piracy or war risk?
- Philippines ferries
- Bigger could mean better
- Navios treads novel ground
- Flashing the cash
- Far-sighted myopia
- Considering a new order
- Trade and Tehran
- Numbers game
- Follow the money
- Political risk and LNG
- Yards at risk
- Boxship bargains
- Lloyd's leads by example
- Wanted: fresh ideas
- Yards and owners to lock...
- Different outlooks
