Why accession to a maritime convention does not mean it is implemented successfully

For many maritime policy-makers and senior managers, depositing the instrument of ratification or accession with the International Maritime Organization (IMO), followed by the official entry into force of the treaty, is seen as the end of the process. Yet in international law and the management of the seas there is a deep gap between “creating an international obligation” and “institutional and operational compliance in practice”. Maritime treaties contain technical standards that, without implementing infrastructure at national level, in effect remain aspirational texts.

Zoom

1. The gap between international obligation and national legislative powers

Accession to a convention establishes the State’s sovereign position in the international system, but it does not in itself create any implementing tools. Effective implementation requires the legal transposition of the treaty’s provisions into the national legislative system and the grant of explicit legal powers to the competent authorities. Without valid national laws and regulations, inspection bodies and public supervisors will lack the legal legitimacy needed to audit ships, detain them for violations or impose deterrent penalties.

2. Establishing the administrative structure, operating procedures and oversight

Even when basic legislation exists, successful implementation depends on a chain of administrative and technical tools:

• Identifying obligations and dividing organisational tasks: defining precisely the tasks of each administrative unit in implementing the convention and avoiding overlap or duplication between organisations.
• Writing procedures and work instructions: turning the treaty’s technical requirements into concrete inspection checklists, transparent certification processes and field operating instructions.
• Monitoring, assessment and continuous improvement: a system for continuously measuring the effectiveness of measures, recording and analysing non-conformities and quickly updating rules in step with international amendments.

Conclusion: three strategic questions before declaring success

Declaring that a convention has been implemented successfully should not be limited to administrative reports of ratification. Before declaring compliance, leaders and senior managers of maritime administrations should establish the answers to three fundamental questions:

1. Are the legal powers needed to implement all the convention’s provisions and technical requirements clearly stated and delegated in national laws and regulations?
2. Are a defined administrative unit, qualified staff and clear operating instructions in place for audits, inspections and the issue of documents?
3. What monitoring mechanism has been defined for periodic assessment of performance, handling of non-conformities and national implementation of later amendments to the convention?