Page 41 - ΝΑΥΤΙΚΑ ΧΡΟΝΙΚΑ - MARTIOS 2023
P. 41

is no enforcement”. These are common
 criticisms but, in my view, perhaps
 premature ones. The regulation is an
 International Maritime Organization
 (IMO) instrument, a convention. Its
 enforcement, as is the case with all
 IMO instruments, lies with the IMO
 Member States. It is primarily the flag
 states that enforce IMO Conventions
 by implementing them in their national
 laws and applying them to the ships
 that fly their flags. In addition, there is
 a second layer of enforcement by the
 Port State Controls directed at foreign
 flagged ships. This is the way the whole
 system is built. 
 So, does the regulation have teeth, or
 not? Is there any “hard” enforcement?
 Any consequences? The answer is that
 there is no hard enforcement, yet, and
 with the CII framework in its current
 form, perhaps that is not a bad thing. At
 least for now. We must remember that
 commercial utilisation of a ship under
 the present CII framework will likely
 lead to a poorer rating by default. Once
 a ship starts calling at ports offloading
 or loading cargo while not moving, sit-
 that may not be commercially worth  ting at anchorages awaiting orders, or
 as much as a ship with a higher rating.   transporting cargo around the world,
 When looking closer at the CII, what it   the rating is by default negatively
 really reflects, however, is a combina-  affected. 
 tion of a certain degree of technical   This framework is flawed, there is no
 efficiency combined with the actual  doubt about that. But it is here to stay
 operation of the ship throughout the  and in its current form, now may not be
 previous year. We already have objective   the best time to call for rigid enforce-
 measures specifically for the technical   ment and consequences. Our industry
 efficiency of a ship: the EEXI and EEDI.   is embarking on new ways of doing
 Most ships are about to have a rating  business, a new way for shipowners and
 attached to them, and it is important to   charterers to work together. There are
 remember that the rating seen in isola-  most certainly teething problems but
 tion is not enough to conclude whether   with the will from everyone involved to
 a ship is inferior or not. The rating of the   do their part and co-operate, I believe
 ship likely says more about the trade it   our industry will be able to adapt to
 performed last year than whether it is   yet another regulation that at least
 inferior or not from a technical efficiency   intends to get us one step closer to
 standpoint.    being greener.  
 Due to the nature of the CII framework,   In the meantime, BIMCO and others
 I believe we should be very careful   are busy working out a more suitable
 sticking an inferior label on ships based   CII metric and scope of application
 on their ratings. It seems fairer to say   to ensure that the rating of a ship is
 that we are labelling the trades that  underpinning the business imperative
 the ships performed the previous year  of the market actors. Hopefully, we
 rather than the ships themselves.   will be able to introduce the neces-
    sary changes during the review of the
 Is it even enforced?   CII framework to be completed before
 “The CII regulation has no teeth”. “There   1 January 2026. 


 40
   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46