Page 46 - ΝΑΥΤΙΚΑ ΧΡΟΝΙΚΑ - ΜΑΙΟΣ 2024

MARINE ENVIRONMENT

were identified following an extensive and thor- be a reference to the birth and evolution of the
ough investigation into their causes. MARPOL Convention without mentioning Yoshio
The outcome of the IMO’s deliberations on those Sasamura, a Japanese naval architect, an IMO
casualties took the form of successive amend- international civil servant, and the first Director
ments to the organisation’s most crucial environ- of the Organisation’s Marine Environment Divi-
mental convention, the International Convention sion. Mr Sasamura’s contribution to the develop-
for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships – the ment of MARPOL’s structure and contents into
now well-known MARPOL Convention. The con- the highly valued legal instrument it is today was
vention, whose 50th anniversary we are cele- instrumental. This is true for the entire extent of
brating this year, was adopted at the end of an MARPOL, save for Chapter VI on Air Pollution from
international conference convened by the IMO in Ships, which was developed towards the end of
1973. In 1978, MARPOL was supplemented by a Mr Sasamura’s life. Paying tribute to his legacy
Protocol, which was deemed necessary in order on this solemn occasion is the least I can do as his
to make the Convention more attractive for Gov- grateful companion.
MARPOL is not ernments to ratify and thus facilitate its entry into MARPOL is not the only IMO Convention that has
the only IMO force. Beyond tackling operational and acciden- pursued the noble objective of keeping the marine
Convention that tal pollution from oil, the MARPOL Convention environment clean. Today, there is an extensive
has pursued the addresses all other sources of marine pollution, regulatory regime for protecting the seas and
noble objective including pollution caused by noxious liquid sub- ensuring ships’ safety throughout their lifecycle,
of keeping stances, harmful substances in packaged form, including a set of legal instruments on civil liability
the marine sewage, and garbage. The Convention dedicates and compensation for victims of pollution inci-
environment one chapter to each of these five sources of pol- dents. In their totality, technical and legal conven-
clean. Today, lution. tions have co-existed in harmony for the best part
there is an The MARPOL Convention was preceded by the of three decades, contributing to a most welcome
extensive International Convention for the Prevention of Pol- and substantial reduction of casualties at sea and
regulatory lution of the Sea by Oil—the OILPOL Convention. marine environment pollution. This success under-
regime for This Convention was adopted by an international scores the effectiveness of the two major IMO
protecting conference convened in London in 1954 at the Conventions (SOLAS and MARPOL), supported by
the seas British Government’s instigation. It was assigned more than thirty other relevant legal instruments.
and ensuring depositary duties and responsibilities after a series Nowadays, people talk about the all too frequent
ships’ safety of tanker casualties resulting in significant pollu- extreme weather conditions and their catastrophic
throughout tion of the seas in the early 1950s and because, consequences. One may then wonder what the
their at the time, the 1948 Convention establishing the impact of the work of IMO in general, and MAR-
lifecycle, IMO had not yet come into force. That happened POL in particular, is within the wider context of
including a in 1958, while its first major undertaking occurred climate change. Although shipping is responsible
set of legal two years later, in 1960, with the convening of an for a relatively low percentage of CO2 emissions
instruments international conference to revise and update the (approximately 2,8% of the world total, within a
on civil 1932 International Convention for the Safety of Life total 27% of all modes of transport of all sources
liability and at Sea (SOLAS). SOLAS, of course, has a fascinating of CO2 emissions) compared to civil aviation (3%)
compensation history, with its first version having been adopted and road transport (21%), it has responded respon-
for victims in 1914 as a result of the tragic loss of the “Titanic”. sibly to the challenges posed by the anthropogenic
of pollution Originally, the IMO entrusted the consideration of climate change by taking a series of demonstrable
incidents. marine pollution matters to a mere sub-committee initiatives. In doing so, it has shown due compas-
under the Maritime Safety Committee. That was sion for the environment and a determination to
until the organisation began producing legisla- act timely and appropriately to reduce its footprint.
tion that could not be accommodated within the That is notable, even though the 2015 Paris Agree-
SOLAS Convention, which was not deemed suit- ment makes no mention of it and despite the flaws
able to tackle the matter efficiently. In response identified in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol as the first
to a growing demand to intensify the efforts to addition to the United Nations Framework Con-
curb pollution from ships, the sub-committee was vention on Climate Change to the UN Framework
upgraded to the status of a fully-fledged Commit- Convention on Climate Change (developed after
tee, namely the Marine Environment Protection the UN Conference and Development, held in Rio
Committee (MEPC). Nowadays, eighty sessions de Janeiro in 1992).
later, the MEPC is given credit for a solid edifice It should be acknowledged that shipping was the
of legislation addressing all possible sources of first industry to adopt—via the IMO—and imple-
marine and atmospheric pollution. ment compulsory measures aimed at improving
On a more personal note, I think there cannot its energy efficiency record through technical and

44