ABSTRACT
In an increasingly environmentally-conscious world, ship-source marine pollution has, for a long time, been singled out for special attention. This attention is hardly commensurate with its actual contribution to marine pollution, which, today, is considered to be about 12 per cent of the total. 1 In other words, it is land-sourced marine pollution that is today the major problem. This was already recognized a decade ago in an important preparatory document for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), in which the UN Secretary-General stated:
Dramatic improvements have been made in controlling oil pollution in the past decade owing to the regulation of ship discharges under MARPOL 1973/1978… Accidental spills are relatively isolated geographically so that, aside from tar balls, transient effects in the vicinity of accidents and more chronic conditions in localized sites in some parts of the world, petroleum pollution does not now represent a severe threat to marine habitats and organisms. However, since accidental spills cannot be totally avoided, contingency planning and effective response action are essential. 2
This was also recognized in the deliberations of UNCED itself in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. 3 However, nothing focuses policy-makers’ and legislators’ attention more directly than a marine disaster. When pollution is involved, a ‘media-event’ is often the result. The media love maritime accidents, which are gripping and exciting and provide great video images—permitting reporters, totally untrained in maritime matters, to wax eloquently at great length on what has happened—and which can often be used to embarrass government officials and politicians. If oil pollution is involved, all the better!