Maritime Law International Law A Comprehensive Overview

The world’s oceans, vast and interconnected, are governed by a complex web of laws. Maritime law, a branch of international law, navigates this intricate system, addressing everything from shipping regulations and environmental protection to piracy and the exploitation of seabed resources. Understanding this legal framework is crucial, not only for those working within the maritime industry but also for anyone interested in the sustainable use and governance of our shared oceans. This exploration delves into the core principles, jurisdictional complexities, and evolving challenges of maritime law within the broader context of international relations.

From historical precedents to modern-day conventions, we’ll examine the key legal instruments shaping maritime activities. We’ll consider the roles of various actors, including flag states, coastal states, international organizations, and individual stakeholders. The discussion will encompass both the successes and challenges in enforcing maritime law, particularly in addressing transnational crimes and environmental concerns. We’ll also consider the impact of technological advancements on the legal landscape and the future of maritime governance.

Defining Maritime Law and International Law

Maritime law and international law are intricately linked, with maritime law forming a significant branch of international law. Understanding their core principles and historical development is crucial for navigating the complexities of global shipping, trade, and resource management.

Core Principles of Maritime Law

Maritime law centers on regulating activities at sea, encompassing navigation, shipping, marine environmental protection, and the exploitation of marine resources. Key principles include freedom of navigation (subject to certain limitations), the sovereign rights of coastal states over their territorial waters, and the principle of flag state jurisdiction – meaning a ship is primarily subject to the laws of the state whose flag it flies. The law also emphasizes the protection of marine environments, aiming to prevent pollution and promote sustainable resource management. These principles aim to ensure safe, efficient, and environmentally responsible use of the world’s oceans.

Historical Development of Maritime Law

Maritime law’s origins trace back to ancient civilizations, with evidence of codified maritime practices in ancient Greece and Rome. The Rhodian Sea Law, a collection of maritime customs dating back to the 3rd century BC, influenced the development of maritime legal principles. Medieval Italian city-states, particularly Amalfi, Pisa, and Venice, also played significant roles in developing maritime law, establishing sophisticated commercial codes and legal practices. The growth of international trade during the Age of Exploration spurred further development, leading to the establishment of international admiralty courts and the gradual codification of maritime law principles. The 19th and 20th centuries saw increased international cooperation, resulting in numerous treaties and conventions aimed at standardizing maritime law.

Comparison of Maritime Law with Other Branches of International Law

While maritime law is a distinct branch of international law, it intersects with other areas, such as international environmental law (regarding marine pollution), international human rights law (concerning the treatment of seafarers), and international criminal law (related to piracy and other maritime crimes). Unlike some areas of international law, which rely heavily on state consent, maritime law has a stronger emphasis on customary international law and established practices developed over centuries. Furthermore, international organizations like the International Maritime Organization (IMO) play a significant role in shaping and implementing maritime law, a level of institutional involvement less prominent in some other areas of international law.

Key Treaties and Conventions Governing Maritime Law

Several key treaties and conventions form the backbone of modern maritime law. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982, is arguably the most significant, establishing a comprehensive legal framework for the world’s oceans, covering issues like territorial waters, exclusive economic zones, and deep seabed mining. The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) focuses on safety standards for ships and their operation, while the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) addresses marine pollution from vessels. These conventions, along with numerous others, work in concert to regulate various aspects of maritime activity.

Jurisdictional Differences Between National and International Maritime Law

Jurisdiction in Maritime Disputes

Determining jurisdiction in maritime disputes is a complex process, often involving multiple states and international bodies. The principles of jurisdiction are crucial for ensuring the effective resolution of conflicts at sea, balancing the interests of various actors and preventing jurisdictional clashes. This section will examine the key players and processes involved.

Flag State Jurisdiction

Flag state jurisdiction refers to the authority of the state whose flag a vessel flies. This is generally considered the primary jurisdiction over a ship and its crew. The flag state has the power to enforce its laws and regulations on board the vessel, regardless of where it is located. This includes investigating crimes committed on board, enforcing maritime labor standards, and ensuring the vessel’s compliance with safety regulations. However, the effectiveness of flag state jurisdiction can be compromised by flags of convenience, where vessels register under a flag of a state with less stringent regulations, leading to a potential loophole in enforcement. For example, a ship registered in a country known for lax safety standards might escape stricter scrutiny compared to one registered in a country with robust maritime regulations.

Coastal State Jurisdiction

Coastal states also exercise jurisdiction over maritime activities within their territorial waters (generally 12 nautical miles from the baseline), contiguous zone (up to 24 nautical miles), and exclusive economic zone (EEZ, extending up to 200 nautical miles). This jurisdiction covers a range of matters, including customs enforcement, immigration control, fisheries management, and environmental protection. Coastal states can enforce their laws against vessels operating within these zones, regardless of the vessel’s flag state. Conflicts can arise when the actions of a vessel in a coastal state’s waters conflict with the flag state’s regulations. For instance, a fishing vessel operating illegally within a coastal state’s EEZ might face sanctions from both the coastal state and its flag state.

Jurisdiction of International Organizations

Several international organizations play a role in resolving maritime disputes or exercising jurisdiction in specific areas. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) sets international standards for shipping safety, maritime security, and environmental protection. While the IMO doesn’t directly adjudicate disputes, its conventions and regulations form the basis for many maritime legal claims. Other organizations, like the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), have specific jurisdictional powers to settle disputes related to the Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS). The UNCLOS itself establishes a framework for jurisdiction over various maritime zones and activities, providing a foundation for resolving conflicts between states.

Approaches to Resolving Maritime Disputes

Several mechanisms exist for resolving maritime disputes. These include diplomatic negotiations, mediation, arbitration, and litigation before international courts or tribunals. Negotiations offer a flexible and cost-effective approach, while mediation involves a neutral third party to facilitate a settlement. Arbitration is a more formal process where a neutral arbitrator or panel makes a binding decision. Litigation before international courts or tribunals, such as ITLOS, provides a more structured and legally binding framework for resolving disputes. The choice of method often depends on the nature of the dispute, the relationship between the parties, and their preferences. A small-scale dispute between two private parties might be best resolved through mediation, whereas a major dispute involving state sovereignty might require the intervention of ITLOS.

Arbitration Process Flowchart

The following describes a simplified flowchart for resolving a maritime dispute through arbitration:

[Diagram description: The flowchart begins with a “Maritime Dispute Arises” box. An arrow points to a “Parties Agree to Arbitration” box. Another arrow points to a “Selection of Arbitrator(s)” box. Then, an arrow leads to a “Hearings and Evidence Presentation” box. After that, an arrow points to a “Arbitrator’s Decision/Award” box. Finally, an arrow leads to a “Enforcement of Award” box. This illustrates the linear progression of a maritime dispute resolution through arbitration.]

Maritime Crimes and Law Enforcement

Maritime law enforcement faces the unique challenge of operating across vast, interconnected bodies of water, often beyond the reach of any single nation’s jurisdiction. This necessitates international cooperation and a robust legal framework to address the diverse range of crimes committed at sea. The complexity arises from jurisdictional ambiguities, the transnational nature of maritime activities, and the difficulty in apprehending and prosecuting offenders in remote locations.

Types of Maritime Crimes

Maritime crimes encompass a broad spectrum of offenses, ranging from relatively minor infractions to serious felonies. These include piracy, armed robbery against ships, smuggling (drugs, weapons, humans), illegal fishing, marine pollution, and violations of maritime safety regulations. The severity of these crimes varies considerably, depending on the specific circumstances and the potential harm caused. For example, piracy, a historically significant threat, remains a serious concern in certain regions, while illegal fishing, though not always violent, contributes to environmental damage and economic losses on a global scale. Smuggling operations, often involving organized crime, pose significant security and public health risks.

Legal Framework for Prosecuting Maritime Crimes

The prosecution of maritime crimes relies on a complex interplay of national and international laws. National laws typically provide the basis for prosecuting crimes committed within a nation’s territorial waters or by its citizens on the high seas. International conventions, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), establish a framework for jurisdiction and cooperation in addressing transnational maritime crimes. UNCLOS, for example, clarifies the rights and responsibilities of states concerning maritime zones and the enforcement of laws within those zones. However, the application of these laws can be challenging in international waters, where jurisdiction is often unclear or contested. The flag state of a vessel usually has primary jurisdiction over crimes committed on board, while the coastal state may have jurisdiction over crimes affecting its interests or environment.

International Cooperation in Maritime Law Enforcement

Effective enforcement of maritime law often requires close collaboration between nations. This collaboration can take various forms, including information sharing, joint patrols, and coordinated operations. For instance, regional organizations like the European Union’s maritime safety agency and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) play a crucial role in coordinating efforts to combat piracy and other maritime crimes. These organizations facilitate information exchange, standardize procedures, and provide technical assistance to states with limited resources. Furthermore, bilateral agreements between nations allow for the pursuit and arrest of suspected offenders across national boundaries, ensuring that criminals are brought to justice regardless of their location.

Challenges in Enforcing Maritime Law in International Waters

Enforcing maritime law in international waters presents significant challenges. The vastness of the oceans, limited resources of many coastal states, and the difficulty in tracking and apprehending offenders in remote areas pose major obstacles. Furthermore, jurisdictional ambiguities can complicate investigations and prosecutions. The lack of a single, globally unified enforcement agency makes coordinating responses to maritime crimes a complex and often slow process. Finally, the involvement of sophisticated criminal networks adds another layer of difficulty, requiring advanced intelligence gathering and collaborative investigative techniques.

International Treaties Addressing Piracy and Other Maritime Crimes

International cooperation in combating maritime crime is largely facilitated through various treaties and conventions. These agreements establish legal frameworks, promote information sharing, and Artikel procedures for prosecution and extradition. A list of key treaties follows:

• United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): Provides a comprehensive legal framework for all aspects of ocean use, including jurisdiction and enforcement.
• United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC): Addresses various forms of organized crime, including those with maritime dimensions.
• International Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA): Focuses on acts of violence and other unlawful acts against the safety of ships.
• International Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA) Protocol: Amends and expands the scope of the SUA convention.
• International Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS): Sets standards for ship safety, addressing issues relevant to crime prevention and investigation.

Maritime Environmental Protection

The protection of the marine environment is a critical aspect of international maritime law, driven by the increasing awareness of the devastating consequences of marine pollution. This section explores the international legal framework designed to mitigate these threats, examining successful and unsuccessful initiatives, state responsibilities, the role of international organizations, and a case study illustrating the legal ramifications of a major environmental incident.

International Legal Instruments Related to Marine Pollution
Numerous international conventions and protocols address various forms of marine pollution. These instruments establish binding obligations on states to prevent, reduce, and control pollution from various sources, including ships, land-based activities, and offshore installations. Key examples include the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), which regulates the discharge of oil, noxious liquid substances, garbage, and sewage from vessels; the London Convention and Protocol, concerning the dumping of wastes at sea; and the Convention on Biological Diversity, which addresses the conservation of marine biodiversity. These instruments often establish stringent standards, enforcement mechanisms, and liability regimes for polluters.

Successful and Unsuccessful Attempts at Environmental Protection
The phasing out of lead in gasoline, a significant source of marine pollution, represents a notable success. The global effort to reduce lead emissions, coordinated through international agreements and national regulations, has dramatically improved air and water quality, benefiting marine ecosystems. Conversely, the persistent problem of plastic pollution highlights ongoing challenges. Despite numerous initiatives and international agreements, plastic continues to accumulate in oceans worldwide, highlighting the difficulty of effectively managing complex, transboundary pollution problems. The lack of consistent enforcement and the difficulty in tracing the sources of pollution often hamper progress.

Responsibilities of States Regarding Marine Environmental Protection
States bear primary responsibility for the protection of their marine environment and for complying with international legal instruments. This includes enacting and enforcing domestic legislation consistent with international standards, establishing monitoring and surveillance systems, and collaborating with other states to address transboundary pollution issues. States also have a responsibility to cooperate in scientific research, data sharing, and the development of effective pollution prevention and control measures. Failure to meet these responsibilities can lead to international legal action and sanctions.

Role of International Organizations in Marine Environmental Protection
International organizations play a crucial role in coordinating international efforts to protect the marine environment. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the primary UN agency responsible for developing and implementing international regulations relating to shipping and the prevention of marine pollution from ships. Other organizations, such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and regional seas conventions, contribute to the development of international standards, monitoring efforts, and the implementation of pollution control measures. These organizations facilitate cooperation among states, provide technical assistance, and promote the sharing of best practices.

Case Study: The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
The 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, serves as a stark illustration of the devastating consequences of marine pollution and the legal complexities involved. The grounding of the Exxon Valdez resulted in the release of millions of barrels of crude oil, causing widespread environmental damage and impacting wildlife, fisheries, and coastal communities. The ensuing legal battles involved claims for damages against Exxon, leading to significant court settlements and the establishment of new environmental regulations. The case highlighted the inadequacy of existing spill response measures and the need for stronger liability frameworks to address the costs associated with major environmental incidents at sea. The long-term ecological impacts of the spill continue to be studied and assessed, demonstrating the lasting consequences of such events.

Maritime Transport and Trade

International maritime transport and trade form the backbone of global commerce, facilitating the movement of goods across oceans and continents. The legal framework governing this complex system is a multifaceted one, involving a network of international conventions, national laws, and contractual agreements. Understanding this framework is crucial for ensuring the smooth and efficient operation of the shipping industry.

The Legal Framework Governing International Shipping

The legal framework governing international shipping is primarily built upon a series of international conventions, supplemented by national legislation and private contracts. These conventions aim to standardize practices, promote safety, and resolve disputes efficiently. Key conventions include the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which establishes the legal regime for the world’s oceans, and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) conventions addressing various aspects of shipping, such as safety, pollution prevention, and liability. National laws further regulate aspects like registration of ships (flags of convenience), crew employment, and port operations. Finally, private contracts, such as charter parties (agreements for the hire of ships), bills of lading (documents of title for goods), and insurance policies, govern the specific commercial relationships within individual shipping transactions.

The Role of International Conventions in Regulating Maritime Transport

International conventions play a pivotal role in harmonizing maritime transport practices globally. They establish minimum safety standards for ships, crew training, and navigation practices. Conventions such as the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) are vital in ensuring safe and environmentally responsible shipping operations. These conventions are regularly updated to reflect technological advancements and evolving safety and environmental concerns. The IMO serves as the primary international body responsible for developing and implementing these conventions, working in collaboration with member states to ensure their effective enforcement. Without these conventions, the inconsistencies in national laws would create significant barriers to international trade and could lead to increased risks.

Common Legal Issues in International Shipping Contracts

International shipping contracts often involve complex legal issues. Disputes frequently arise concerning cargo damage or loss, delays in delivery, breaches of contract, and issues of liability. Determining the jurisdiction for resolving disputes can also be challenging, as contracts often involve parties from different countries. The interpretation of Incoterms (International Commercial Terms), which define the responsibilities of buyers and sellers regarding shipping arrangements, is a frequent source of conflict. Furthermore, issues related to the limitation of liability for shipowners and other parties involved in the transport chain often require careful legal consideration. Effective risk management strategies, including robust contractual provisions and insurance coverage, are essential to mitigate these potential issues.

The Impact of Technology on Maritime Transport and Trade Law

Technological advancements are significantly impacting maritime transport and trade law. The increasing use of autonomous vessels, digitalization of shipping documentation, and the development of sophisticated tracking systems are creating new legal challenges and opportunities. Questions surrounding liability for accidents involving autonomous ships, the legal validity of electronic bills of lading, and the protection of data privacy are all areas requiring further legal clarification. The legal framework needs to adapt to these technological changes to ensure the continued safety, efficiency, and security of maritime transport while also addressing emerging concerns. For instance, the use of blockchain technology offers potential for streamlining documentation processes and improving transparency, but it also necessitates the development of appropriate legal frameworks to regulate its use.

Types of Maritime Transport and Their Legal Implications

Salvage and Wreck Removal

Salvage and wreck removal are crucial aspects of maritime law, balancing the rights of owners of vessels and cargo with the incentives for those who undertake the risky and often expensive task of recovering property from the sea. The legal principles governing these operations are complex and internationally recognized, aiming to fairly compensate salvors while ensuring the safe and efficient removal of hazards to navigation.

Legal Principles Governing Salvage Operations

The fundamental principle governing salvage is that it is a reward for services rendered, not a contractual right. Salvage is governed by international conventions, such as the International Convention on Salvage 1989 (which many states have ratified), and also by national legislation. A successful salvage operation requires demonstrating that a vessel or property was in peril, that services were rendered that contributed to saving the property, and that the salvor acted voluntarily. The reward is determined based on the value of the property saved, the skill and effort expended, the risks undertaken, and the success achieved. The amount awarded is typically a percentage of the value of the property saved, and it’s often subject to judicial determination if the parties can’t agree.

Rights and Responsibilities of Salvors

Salvors have a right to a reasonable reward for their services, secured by a maritime lien on the saved property. This lien gives them a priority claim over other creditors. However, salvors also have significant responsibilities. They must act with reasonable skill and care, taking all necessary precautions to avoid further damage to the property or causing harm to the environment. They must also comply with all relevant laws and regulations, including those pertaining to pollution prevention. Failure to meet these responsibilities can result in a reduction or denial of salvage reward.

Legal Framework for Wreck Removal

The legal framework for wreck removal is often intertwined with salvage law. Wreck removal is typically the responsibility of the vessel owner, but if the owner fails to act or is unknown, the coastal state may intervene to remove the wreck, especially if it poses a navigational hazard or environmental threat. The coastal state often has the authority to direct the removal and may recover the costs involved from the vessel owner if they can be identified. International conventions, like the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), address wreck removal indirectly by requiring vessels to maintain standards that minimize the risk of accidents leading to wrecks.

Examples of Significant Salvage Operations and Their Legal Implications

The salvage of the Costa Concordia cruise ship in 2012 presented significant legal challenges. The complex operation, involving rotating the ship and refloating it, resulted in a protracted legal battle over the allocation of salvage reward among various parties involved. Similarly, the salvage of the Rena container ship, which ran aground on Astrolabe Reef in New Zealand in 2011, led to complex legal issues concerning environmental liability and compensation for the extensive damage caused. These cases highlight the intricate legal considerations and the often substantial financial implications of large-scale salvage operations.

Hypothetical Salvage Operation and Legal Steps Involved

Let’s consider a hypothetical scenario: A cargo ship, the “Ocean Trader,” encounters a severe storm and loses engine power, drifting towards a rocky coastline. A nearby tugboat, the “Sea Lion,” responds and successfully tows the “Ocean Trader” to safety. The legal steps involved would include:

1. Initial Assessment of Peril: The “Sea Lion” would need to establish that the “Ocean Trader” was in genuine peril.
2. Salvage Services Rendered: Documentation of the services provided by the “Sea Lion,” including the duration, effort, and risks involved, would be crucial.
3. Negotiation of Salvage Reward: The “Sea Lion” and the “Ocean Trader’s” owner would ideally negotiate a fair salvage reward. This would likely involve assessing the value of the saved vessel and cargo.
4. Arbitration or Litigation: If negotiations fail, either party could seek arbitration or litigation to determine the appropriate salvage reward. This would involve presenting evidence to a court or arbitration panel.
5. Enforcement of Maritime Lien: If the “Ocean Trader’s” owner fails to pay the agreed-upon or court-ordered salvage reward, the “Sea Lion” could enforce its maritime lien on the vessel or its cargo.

Seabed Resources and the Law of the Sea

The seabed, extending beyond national jurisdictions, presents a unique legal and resource management challenge. The exploitation of its mineral wealth, including polymetallic nodules, cobalt crusts, and seafloor massive sulfides, necessitates a robust international legal framework to ensure equitable sharing and sustainable practices. This framework, primarily established through the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), balances the interests of states with the principle of the common heritage of mankind.

The legal regime governing the exploitation of seabed resources is primarily defined by UNCLOS Part XI, which establishes the International Seabed Authority (ISA) as the central governing body. This section Artikels the principles for exploration and exploitation of resources in the Area (the seabed beyond national jurisdiction), emphasizing environmental protection and the equitable distribution of benefits. The ISA’s role extends to licensing, environmental regulations, and revenue collection, ensuring that activities in the deep sea are conducted responsibly and for the benefit of all humankind.

The International Seabed Authority

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) is an autonomous international organization established under UNCLOS. Its primary functions include regulating prospecting, exploration, and exploitation of mineral resources in the Area, issuing licenses, collecting royalties, and ensuring environmental protection. The ISA’s Council, comprised of 36 member states, makes key decisions on policy and regulations. The Legal and Technical Commission provides scientific and technical advice, contributing to the development of environmentally sound mining standards. The ISA’s functioning relies heavily on the cooperation of its member states and its capacity to effectively monitor and enforce its regulations. The Authority’s budget is funded primarily through contributions from its member states and royalties from mining activities.

The Common Heritage of Mankind

The concept of the “common heritage of mankind” is a cornerstone of the legal regime governing seabed resources. It asserts that the resources of the deep seabed, beyond national jurisdiction, are the common heritage of all humankind and should be managed for the benefit of present and future generations. This principle underscores the importance of equitable sharing of benefits derived from the exploitation of these resources, preventing their appropriation by a select few nations or corporations. The implementation of this principle is reflected in the ISA’s mandate to distribute revenues from seabed mining equitably among all member states, particularly developing nations.

Challenges in Regulating Deep-Sea Resource Exploitation

Regulating the exploitation of deep-sea resources presents several significant challenges. Technological limitations in deep-sea mining, coupled with the high costs involved, create barriers to entry for many nations. Furthermore, the potential environmental impacts of deep-sea mining remain largely unknown, necessitating precautionary approaches and robust environmental impact assessments. The lack of complete scientific understanding of deep-sea ecosystems poses another significant challenge, making it difficult to predict and mitigate the potential effects of mining activities on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Finally, ensuring compliance with international regulations and resolving disputes between stakeholders require effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, which are currently under development and require significant investment.

Legal Framework for Polymetallic Nodule Exploration and Exploitation

Polymetallic nodules, rich in manganese, nickel, cobalt, and copper, are a primary target for deep-sea mining. The legal framework for their exploration and exploitation is Artikeld in UNCLOS Part XI and further developed by the ISA’s regulations. The ISA issues contracts for exploration and exploitation, specifying areas, environmental protection measures, and financial obligations. These contracts require detailed environmental impact assessments and adherence to stringent environmental standards to minimize potential harm to the deep-sea environment. The process involves a series of stages, from exploration to exploitation, with each stage subject to ISA approval and oversight. The sharing of benefits derived from polymetallic nodule mining is a central aspect of the legal framework, ensuring equitable distribution amongst all member states, particularly those developing countries.

Conclusive Thoughts

Maritime law, as a critical component of international law, is constantly evolving to meet the challenges of a globalized and increasingly interconnected world. The complexities of jurisdiction, the need for effective international cooperation, and the urgency of environmental protection demand a dynamic and adaptive legal framework. This overview has highlighted the key principles, challenges, and ongoing developments in this crucial field, emphasizing the importance of continued collaboration and innovation to ensure the sustainable and responsible use of the world’s oceans.

Popular Questions

What is the difference between maritime law and admiralty law?

While often used interchangeably, admiralty law is a specific branch of maritime law focusing on legal issues related to ships and maritime commerce. Maritime law is broader, encompassing aspects such as environmental protection and seabed resource management.

Who is responsible for enforcing maritime law in international waters?

Enforcement in international waters is complex. While flag states have primary responsibility for their vessels, coastal states have jurisdiction in their territorial waters. International cooperation through organizations like the IMO is crucial for tackling transnational maritime crimes.

What is the role of the International Maritime Organization (IMO)?

The IMO is a specialized agency of the UN responsible for developing and implementing international standards for shipping safety, maritime security, and marine environmental protection. It creates conventions and regulations that are adopted by member states.