ASSIGNMENT TOPIC

This assignment report is a partial fulfillment of course Admiralty & Maritime Law

Submitted To,

Hillol Shaha
Lecturer
Department of Law

Premier University, Chittagong

Submitted By,

Tasmia Iislam
LLM (1st Semester)
ID: 1501720101090

Premier University, Chittagong

Date of Submission

_ _ _ December, 2015

_ _ _ December, 2015
Hillol Shaha
Lecturer, Department of Law
Premier University, Chittagong
Subject:

To submit an assignment report on How Far International Instrument

is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution.

Dear Sir,
This is to inform you that I have completed my assignment report on How Far
International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution. This
assignment report was assigned to me as a partial requirement of the Admiralty &
Maritime Law course in LLM, first semester.
Here I tried my best to evaluate the effectiveness of international instruments to prevent
marine environmental pollution.
I have tried sincerely to comprehend and translate my knowledge in writing this
assignment report. I enjoyed this study & project work and gladly attend any of your calls
to clarify points, if necessary.
In preparing this report I have followed the instructions of yours. I will be glad to clarify
any discrepancy that may arise.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,

Tasmia Iislam
LLM (1st Semester)
ID: 1501720101090
Premier University, Chittagong

At the beginning I would like to convey my sincere appreciation to the almighty Allah for
giving me the strength & the ability to finish the task within the planned time. This
assignment report is an accumulation of many peoples endeavor. So I would like to expressly
sincere gratitude to everyone who contributed towards preparing & making this successfully.
First of all, I would like to express my Sincere & Immense gratitude to my course teacher Mr.
Hillol Shaha, Lecturer, Department of Law, Premier University, Chittagong. I am deeply
indebted to him for whole hearted supervision to me during the study period. His valuable
suggestion & guideline helped us a lot to prepare the report in a well-organized manner.

Tasmia Iislam
LLM (1st Semester)
ID: 1501720101090
Premier University, Chittagong

As natural resources come under increasing pressure around the world, national
governments, international agencies, communities and businesses are increasingly called
upon to address environmental problems. However, continual budget constraints and
institutional weaknesses often make it difficult to achieve the necessary levels of
environmental protection.
International instruments make use of market mechanisms and provide one important
approach to address this challenge. They encompass a broad array of policy tools, ranging
from pollution taxes and marketable permits to deposit-refund systems and performance
bonds. International instruments are applied across a similarly wide-ranging set
of policy sectors, including land, water and air management, and control or reduction of
pollutants. They either drive up the cost of environmentally harmful activities or increase
the returns from sustainable approaches, thereby creating economic incentives to behave
in a more environmentally responsible and sustainable manner.
Finally, this report seeks to help policy makers, especially in the developing world, to
identify, evaluate and apply international instruments to address a country's
environmental problems within its national and local circumstances. It presents an
innovative approach by offering tools for a comprehensive assessment of the country
context and conditions and by tailoring solutions to the specific country needs. The report
also provides practical guidance on identifying when economic instruments may be most
appropriate, and on strengthening the support framework needed to introduce them.

NAME

Page no

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CHAPTER - 01

Introduction

CHAPTER - 02

Conceptual Framework of the Study

CHAPTER - 03
CHAPTER - 04

International Instruments for Remedying

Marine Pollution
Searching for Effective International
Instruments

6
9

CHAPTER - 05

Prevention

11

CHAPTER - 06

Effectiveness through Implementation,

Compliance and Enforcement

12

Bibliography

14

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Threats to human health and environmental quality continue to grow worldwide. Patterns of
industrial production, as well as the use of natural and land resources, are important
contributing factors. While environmental problems vary in their details, they generally
involve either overuse of a natural resource or emission of damaging pollutants.
Transitioning to more sustainable use patterns is both difficult and expensive even under
optimum conditions. Developing countries face the added challenges of severe funding
constraints, weak institutional capacity, and a dependence on environmental and natural
resources for economic development.

1.2 - Rationale of the study

The report is assigned by our Course teacher Mr. Hillol Shaha sir as a part of our Admiralty &
Maritime Law course. The topic of the report is How Far International Instrument is
Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution.
By conducting this study we can enhance our knowledge and skill to apply various research
methods in professional life or higher educational life. This assignment report helped us to make
a bridge between the gap of classroom learning and practical learning.

1.3 Objectives of the report

Primary objective:
To evaluate the effectiveness of international instruments to prevent marine environmental
pollution.
Secondary objectives:
The report has the following objectives
To familiar international instruments.
To analyze the effectiveness of international instruments to prevent marine
environmental pollution.
To focus on the solution t this environmental pollution

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

1.4 Scope of the Study

Good
international
environmental
governance
in
marine
pollution
matters
largely rests with effective instruments of liability and compensation for transboundary
environmental
damage.
This
paper
examines
concepts
and
legal
instruments in global and regional international law for providing prompt, adequate
and effective compensation for harm to the marine environment itself, on the
example of the Southern Ocean.

1.5 Methodology
This study is based on secondary data. Secondary data collected by the following waysMethodology
Study
Information

Data collection
Data Analysis

Personal Evaluation
How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine
Environmental Pollution
Journals, Publications, international conferences.
Qualitative
Quantitative
UN websites & publications.
In-depth study on international instruments &
Primary data
effectiveness to prevent marine environmental
pollution.
Secondary information Websites, online articles.
Qualitative content analysis

1.6 Limitations
The present study was not out of limitations. But it was a great opportunity for me to know about
international instruments & effectiveness to prevent marine environmental pollution. Some
constraints are as follows:
The main constraints of the dissertation are inadequate access to information, which has
hampered the scope of analysis required for the dissertation.
Due to time limitations many of the aspects could not be discussed in the dissertation.
Lack of current information.
Because of time shortage many related area cannot be focused in depth.
Recent data and information on different activities was unavailable.
I was short in hands.
Lack of the part of experience of the researchers.
Unconfirmed accuracy of certain information acquired.
Lack of information from the primary source.
The evaluation may not be effective enough.

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 2

Conceptual Framework of the Study

2.1 Beginning
The last century saw the fall of the vision of the oceans as an inexhaustible reservoir of resources
to be plundered and polluted by humankind at will. Ever since the tanker Torrey Canyon ran
aground on Pollard Rock on the Seven Stone Reef in Cornwall on 18 March 1967, the
international community has struggled with many legal, political and human dimensions of
vessel-sourced pollution incidents. Despite the extensive international legal responses to this
ecological challenge the catastrophic proportions of the 2002 Prestige and 1999 Erica tanker
spills highlight the ineffectiveness of the present approach in combating vessel-sourced
pollution.1 While an ounce of prevention is still worth a pound of cure, this paper argues that
good international environmental governance in marine pollution matters largely rests with
effective international instruments of liability and compensation for transboundary
environmental damage.
International liability and compensation regimes related to vessel-sourced pollution emerged as a
reaction to the unwillingness and incapability of flag States to institute elaborate domestic
regimes for remedying of transboundary pollution damage, as well as in order to harmonies
various municipal legal systems. Namely, legal rules on liability and redress are commonly
developed on a domestic level, however, the problem of the inadequacy of such domestic
regimes is particularly evident in the sphere of marine pollution given that almost 50 percent of
the world maritime fleet is registered with the flags of convenience (FOC) countries, that offer
relaxed environmental regulation, and a more lenient system of fines and sanctions.
In response to this, international instruments of liability and compensation were established
either in the form of a separate treaty or a supplementary element to an existing multilateral
maritime environmental agreement (MMEA). The first such international instruments that also
remain the only operative and successful ones are the 1969 International Convention on Civil
Liability for Oil Pollution Damage [1969 CLC], and the 1971 International Convention on the
Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage [1971 Fund
Convention].
Despite numerous other international agreements having since been negotiated, they have not
come into force as yet. What is more, Daniel warns that of the regimes that have been
developed and are not in force, there are flaws in those regimes that have been identified.

2.2 VESSEL-SOURCED MARINE POLLUTION

Vessel-sourced pollution is a wide generic term that includes accidental spills and intentional
discharges by sea-going vessels. Pollution of the marine environment is most appropriately
described in 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea [UNCLOS] as:

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

the introduction by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy into the marine
environment, including estuaries, which results or is likely to result in such deleterious
effects as harm to living resources and marine life, hazards to human health, hindrance
to marine activities, including fishing and other legitimate uses of the sea, impairment of
quality for use of sea water and reduction of amenities.
The 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships as amended by the
1978 Protocol [MARPOL] defines vessel-sourced pollution incidents as:
An event involving the actual or probable discharge into the sea of a harmful
substance, or effluents containing such substances.
In principle, vessel-sourced pollution comprises all categories of pollutants originating from all
types of vessels engaged in navigation or transportation. This term extends to pollution wherever
it may occur affecting the marine environment of whichever section of the oceans and seas.
Accidental pollution by oil when carried as cargo is still believed to be the most common
pollutant originating from ships. According to International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation
Limited (ITOPF), the number of oil spills caused by tankers has decreased dramatically since the
1970s when the annual average of spills was 25.2, in comparison to 3.8 spills average in the
period revising 2000-2004.
Despite the decrease in the number of incidents, their severity, however, remains alarming when
considering the quantities of oil spilt.12 Moreover, contrary to general perception, the greatest
threat of ecological harm from ships comes from operational discharges, and in particular the
illegal discharge of oil through routine operations. The 2003 OECD Report indicates that:
The illegal discharge of oil into the sea through routine operations is equal
to over eight times the Exxon Valdez oil spill or over 48 times the 1997
Nakhodka spill off the coast of Japan - every year.
Aside from oil, seaborne transport of hazardous substances carried in packaged forms, or
noxious liquid chemicals carried in bulk, also have the potential for environmental catastrophe.
The IMO warns that over 50 percent of goods carried in dry cargo ships, including chemical
tankers, are potentially dangerous. Though rare, accidents involving nuclear ships or ships
carrying radioactive matter also still occur.
In addition, it was only in the past 15 years that the scientific community managed to persuade
States and maritime related industries to address the serious detrimental effects of ballast waters
released in pristine marine eco-systems, the dumping of sewage and garbage from ships, and the
harmful characteristics of certain substances used as anti-fouling systems for ships hulls.17 It is
also important to note that the dumping of waste at sea18 and atmospheric pollution19 fall
outside the notion of vessel sourced pollution and will not therefore be examined here.
Pollution by ships must also be distinguished from marine pollution caused by seabed activities
and land-based sources. Still, where an incident is such that it was caused by a
This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

vessel that was not engaged in the activities in the Area as defined in UNCLOS,
in particular that of exploration and exploitation of the seabed and the subsoil, such incidents are
taken into account.

2.3 Searching for an Ocean

In 2000, the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) delimited as the worlds fifth ocean
a vast body of water encircling Antarctica, and linking the Indian, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans the Southern Ocean The IHO defines the Southern Ocean as the body of water falling below the
600S.
It is, however, argued that the Southern Ocean in fact extends beyond 600S, as far north as the
Antarctic Convergence - a divide between the cold Antarctic waters and the warmer more
northerly waters. Therefore, while its southern boundary is taken to be the coast of the
Antarctic continent, the outer limits of the Southern Ocean follow the line of the Antarctic
Convergence, customarily referred to as the biographic boundary that separates the Antarctic
environment from that of the rest of the world.
Given that the Antarctic Convergence is an intrinsically unsettled natural occurrence, the
northern boundaries of the Southern Ocean are understood to follow the coordinates of the
Antarctic Convergence set in the 1980 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine
Living Resources [CCAMLR].

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 3

International Instruments for Remedying

Marine Pollution
3.1 SETTING THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The international law of marine pollution can be found in all the sources of international
environmental law:
1. Legally binding instruments:
a. Treaty law;
b. International customary law;
c. General principles of international law;
d. Judicial decisions;
e. Writings of eminent publicists.
2. International soft law.
Apart from global international law, regional instruments for environmental governance of the
Ocean, in particular the Antarctic Treaty, and the 1991 Protocol on Environmental Protection to
the Antarctic Treaty [Environmental Protocol], are also considered in this study.

3.2 Framework Treaties

The two milestone multilateral agreements specifically concerning environmental law of the
oceans and seas are MARPOL and UNCLOS. MARPOL is an example of an MMEA that has
advanced beyond a compendium of rules and regulations into an international environmental
regime (IER) viewed by Young and Levy as the social institutions consisting of agreed upon
principles, norms, rules, procedures, and programs that govern the interactions
of actors in specific issue areas. Neither MARPOL nor UNCLOS provide remedies for shipsourced pollution damage, save through the concept of state responsibility, which will not be
subject to analysis in this study.

Pollution by Oil
Apart from the abovementioned treaties, a number of other international agreements and
supplementary legal instruments have been negotiated regarding tanker oil pollution. None of
these establish liability and compensation regimes:
1969 International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil
Pollution Casualties [1969 Intervention Convention];

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

1990 International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation [OPRC 1990];
Annex I to MARPOL.

Pollution by Hazardous Substances

Several legal instruments regulate pollution in connection with the carriage of hazardous noxious
substances (HNS):
HNS Convention;
2000 Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to Pollution Incidents by

Hazardous and Noxious Substances [OPRC-HNS Protocol];

Annex II to MARPOL;
Annex III to MARPOL;
1974 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea [SOLAS].
From the above instruments, only the HNS Convention establishes a liability and compensation
regime.

Marine Pollution by Radioactive Matter

There are two types of nuclear incidents involving radioactive substances at sea, governed under
two separate regimes, in particular:
Pollution by a ship operated by means of nuclear power (nuclear ships)
Pollution during carriage of radioactive substances.

Pollution by nuclear ships is effectively left unregulated given that the sole instrument governing
such incidents is the 1962 Nuclear Ships Convention that has never come into force. On the one
hand, nuclear incident occurring during transboundary transport of radioactive substances is
extensively regulated under domestic law, and a number of treaties and other soft law
international instruments.

Pollution by All Other Substances

Pollution by garbage and discharge of sewage from ships is regulated under Annexes IV and V
to MARPOL, respectively. Neither of these two Annexes contains provisions on liability and
compensation whatsoever. Similarly, the Ballast Water Convention68 and the Anti-fouling
Convention69 solely focus on the complex technical aspects of pollution prevention and
regulation, while completely omitting rules on liability and compensation. Both conventions
are yet to come into force. Another important maritime liability treaty is the 1976 Convention on
Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims [LLMC] and its 1996 Protocol. The Convention

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

establishes uniform rules on limitation of liability for maritime claims as a general category, thus
possibly including claims for environmental damage pursuant to vessel-sourced pollution.

3.2 The International Law Commissions Project on International

Liability
In 2004 the International Law Commission (ILC) adopted after over 26
years of negotiations the Draft Principles on the allocation of loss in the case of
transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities. These Principles are the
second and the final stage of the ILCs project on International liability for
injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law
that was placed on its agenda in 1978. In 1992 this project was divided into
two segments - prevention and international liability, with the first phase
finalised in 2001 with the adoption of the 2001 Draft Articles on the Prevention
of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities. The 2001 ILCs Draft Articles
solely define and impose obligations on States with regard to prevention of
transboundary harm, whereas the topic of international liability went on to
undergo extensive structural metamorphosis for another three years before
being completed in 2004 in the form of the Draft Principles.
As a soft law agreement general and residual in nature, the 2004 ILCs
Draft Principles represent a (d) evolution from the previous proposals that sought
to establish a comprehensive liability and compensation mechanism. These
Principles are solely meant to provide appropriate guidance to States in respect of hazardous
activities not covered by specific agreements, and to indicate matters that should be dealt with in
such agreements. Consequently, they did not echo noticeably with the scholars or the
international legal community.

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 4

SEARCHING FOR EFFECTIVE

INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS
Firstly, the discussion on effectiveness considers the justifiability of the various concepts and
instruments of liability and compensation presently employed in the above nominated
international regimes related to vessel-sourced pollution in the sense of providing prompt and
adequate compensation when the same is not otherwise available.
Secondly, the discussion considers the role of liability, and in a wider sense MMEAs, in
deterrence of future incidents, arguing that any such role is at present minor.
As the third evaluation test, the study examines the authority of the regimes as per their
enforcement and compliance. When considering that the majority of the
MMEAs do not comprise rules on liability and compensation at all, and only
one comprehensive regime is in force, the test of authority becomes a quest to
discover the rationale for the inertness in the overall international liability law
concerning vessel-sourced pollution.
For the purpose of this discussion, compliance is understood as whether States meet their
obligations assumed under MMEAs, while enforcement relates to the implementation of
consequences for non-compliance with the adopted treaty obligations.
Implementation is comprised within the notion of enforcement, and it specifically refers to
incorporating international norms into domestic law through legislation, judicial
decision, executive decree or other process.
One must note that authority of an international instrument is interlinked with the notion of
legitimacy that Vidas defines as determining whether and to what extent those addressed by
a rule see themselves as obligated by it.
Legitimacy and effectiveness are considered separate notions. Nonetheless, the position assumed
for the purpose of this paper is that success of an MMEA or an IER inevitably draws on
successful enforcement and compliance, which warrants a brief discussion.
Table 1 below is provided for the purpose of offering a comparative overview of the key features
of the relevant agreements from section 3 of this paper. Table 1 considers whether MMEAs
determine any or all of the following:

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

Pure environmental damage as compensable;
Pure environmental damage affecting the

high seas marine environment as

compensable;
Persons liable and the standard of liability imposed on them;
Financial security: compulsory insurance and/or pollution compensation
fund;
Conflict of laws rules: court of competent jurisdiction, applicable law, and
guarantee of the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments;
Provisions on residual State liability.

Table 1 also indicates whether an MMEA is in force or not, the number of its State parties, and
the percentage of the world fleet that it is representative of.

Table 1 Overview of international maritime liability regimes concerning vessel-sourced pollution

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

10

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 5

PREVENTION
International liability and compensation regimes contribute to pollution prevention given that
they attribute harmful consequences for inflicted environmental harm to the polluter. Liability in
general is designed as one of the many subsidiary means of deterrence. Strict liability as
envisaged in the international maritime liability and compensation schemes, is not a strong
deterrent given that its primary focus is placed on providing compensation, rather than
punishing/deterring the polluter. It is the amount of damages awarded on account of pollution
damage, which determines the potentially preventive effect.
Liability holds greater importance in pollution prevention when damage is the result of
someones negligence or intent, rather than being purely accidental. But even in this case, only
when the liability is defined as unlimited, or when the set limits go beyond the threshold of
reasonableness, can preventive effect of fault liability be significant. Limits of strict liability are
presently at an inadequate level so as to deter polluters.
Prevention through liability and the award of damages would best be achieved
by punitive damages in cases when the polluter acted with intent and malice in
causing environmental harm. Punitive damages would be particularly effective
when attributed solely based on the violation of an environmental obligation, or the threat of
environmental harm, regardless of whether injurious consequences occurred or not.
Similarly, it is not the international liability and compensation regimes that will ever assume the
role, or be the most effective deterrents.
The central role lies with regulatory mechanisms, and maximizing cooperation between States, in
particular capacity building and technical assistance to developing States and States in transition.
Domestic environmental liability regimes, and in some cases regional ones, will have a stronger
deterrent component as they often employ instruments such as unlimited fault liability, imposing
of punitive damages, and in case of the EU, even criminal liability for vessel-sourced pollution.

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

11

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

CHAPTER 6

Effectiveness through Implementation,

Compliance and Enforcement
The connection between effectiveness and the degree of enforcement of and compliance with an
international regime is self-evident. A regime that is not enforced or complied with is destined to
fail. Given that apart from the nuclear and tanker oil pollution regimes, no other relevant regime
is in force, the issue is one of implementation, as much as enforcement.
One must be cautious and note that neither the broad participation of the international
community in a treaty regime, nor the high level of compliance, is a guarantee of effectiveness in
the sense that an international liability instrument will achieve its goal of providing effective
remedy.
Still, it is necessary to look to reasons why states are not implementing and enforcing
international instruments on liability and redress that they have signed.

6.2 The Problem of Implementation

The reality is that developing countries and countries in transition often sign or adhere to treaties
without having the right domestic infrastructure, the know-how or the funds to implement and
enforce them.
Other elements impeding upon implementation and enforcement refer to costs associated with
these processes. This includes expenses intrinsic to the establishment of the conventions
secretariat; providing technical assistance; setting up and managing a pollution compensation
fund, and other. However, in some cases delays in ratification are difficult to comprehend.
For example, in case of the 2001 Bunkers Convention, Australia was the state that made the first
proposal for such an international instrument in 1994, and was a part of the initiative and later on
the negotiating team for this convention until its adoption in 2001. Australia
to date has not ratified the Bunkers Convention, and neither have any of the six countries, apart
from South Africa, that submitted the 1996 Joint Statement advocating the need for such an
international agreement before the IMO Legal Committee.

6.3 Conclusion
his study has demonstrated that the present formula of strict liability plus reasonable
compensation in relation to marine environmental pollution, suffers many shortcomings
resulting in the complete lack of regulatory response regarding certain types of pollution
incidents, the delayed coming into force of the negotiated treaties, and the incompleteness of the
international regimes which are in force.

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

12

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

Regimes in relation to highly hazardous activities have been established, and out of those only
the tanker oil pollution regime is enforced successfully.
The number of negotiated treaties that are not implemented or complied with reveals the
inconsistency between actual States positions concerning international liability for
environmental harm and the attitudes expressed in the negotiated and adopted international
agreements. This study questioned international civil liability as the most appropriate means by
which to keep raising the bar when it comes to the level of compensation available concerning
pure environmental damage.

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

13

How Far International Instrument is Effective to Prevent Marine Environmental Pollution

Bibliography
Websites
For the status of the Ballast Water Convention, see the IMO:
<www.imo.org/includes/blastDataOnly.asp/data_id%3D12617/status.xls>
(Accessed on: 06.12.2015)
IOPC Funds Annual Report 2004:
<www.iopcfund.org/npdf/AR2003English.pdf>
(Accessed on: 06.12.2015)
the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for
Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage
<wwww.iopcfunds.org> (Accessed on: 06.12.2015)

Books & Journals

Anderson, G. and B. Fiedor. 1995. "Environmental Charges in Poland," in R.
Bluffstone and B. Larson, eds., Controlling Pollution in Transition Economies
(Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar Publishing).
Arora, S. and T. Cason. 1995. "An Experiment in Voluntary Environmental
Regulation: Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program," Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 271-286.

UNCLOS,

art. 236; MARPOL, art. 3(3); see also 1926 International convention for the
unification of certain rules concerning the immunity of state-owned ships, with the Protocol of 24
May 1934, 176 LNTS 199, (in force 8 January 1937).

S Dehner Vessel-source pollution and public vessels: sovereign immunity v. compliance,

implications for international environmental law (1995) 9 Emory Int L Rev 507
employs the term public vessel.

Antarctic Treaty, art. 1.

2003 Protocol to the 1992 Fund Convention, art. 14.
1992 Liability Convention, art. 3 (1); HNS Convention, art. 7.
The Sea Empress incident was known to be caused by the

pilot; see the 1971 IOPC Fund

documentation, 1971 Fund/EXC.55/19 (24 October 1997).

Basel Liability Protocol, art. 4(1); Bunkers Convention, art. 1 (3)

Environmental Protocol Annex VI, art. 2(c).

This assignment report has been prepared by Tasmia Islam

14