The International Maritime Organisation's (IMO) Code requires shipping terminals and shipping lines to appoint security officers at transhipment facilities and aboard their vessels in order to police security measures and procedures. Without certification, the ICC is fearful that countries, their ports and shipping will effectively be 'blacklisted' as bona fide shipping operators begin to avoid them.
"Failure to meet these conditions could seriously disrupt – or at worse bring to a halt – the flow of international commerce," warns the ICC in an official statement obtained by SMT. "Non-compliance could also result in distortions in competition between ports, operators and countries, and may have longer term implications for businesses and national economies."
IMO did not actually publish the figures, which were leaked by the ICC, but when questioned an IMO spokesperson told SMT: "Our secretary general has called on more than one occasion for all Member Governments to redouble their efforts in a bid to fully comply with this legislation."
The IMO survey was based on responses from 35 countries, with the results covering 65% of ship numbers and 83% of tonnage. The results were released to IMO's Maritime Safety Committee at a recent meeting. It approved further guidelines on implementing the Code, such as security measures and procedures at the ship/port interfaces and shipyards. The Committee also released a complimentary draft International Labour Office/IMO Code of Practice on security in ports.
The survey's release follows hot-on-the-heels of an Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) report advising "Governments and transport authorities... to tighten security of the freight container industry, and thus reduce the risk of possible terrorist attack."
The OECD notes that, although security on ships and at ports has been strengthened in recent times, little has been done to address inland security risks relating to cargo containers (of which there are 250 million movements every year).
Source
SMT
No comments yet