|
Despite
strong criticism from shipowners,
the US has indicated that it would
proceed with its plans for
transparency of vessel ownership as
part of a new international maritime
security regime.
“The
world has a need to know who has
effective control of these
vessels,” said Capt Anthony
Regalbuto, the US Coast Guard’s
director of port security and a
member of the US delegation to the
IMO’s recent Maritime Safety
Committee meeting on terrorism in
London.
Transparency
of ownership is developing into
perhaps a challenging of the
proposals put to the meeting by the
US.
Shipowner
organisations including Intertanko
and the Union of Greek Shipowners
have now begun to unite against the
idea, describing it as unworkable,
potentially counter-productive and
fraught with legal and practical
obstacles.
Shipowners
around the world are mobilising
against the proposal as they contend
that scrutiny should focus primarily
on the vessel operator, and that
shipmanagers should designate a
responsible person for security as a
first point of contact.
Shipowners
reject the notion that making
ownership details public will help
counter terrorism.
Efforts
to increase industry transparency as
part of the drive to tighten
maritime security in the wake of
September 11 could prove
commercially damaging and in some
cases unworkable, Intertanko
officials have warned.
Information
on the ownership of a vessel, they
say, is practically irrelevant,
since so many shareholders are
simply passive investors of one form
or another with no management
involvement.
If
a shipowner is involved in
terrorism, they argue, he is
unlikely to put it down on paper,
and anyway, such activity would be a
function of his role as manager
rather than owner.
|
