LIST of ABSTRACTS

Maria Pia Benosa, IMO and MASS

Emergent autonomous or remotely operated platforms in commercial shipping and naval technology give rise to questions on the enduring applicability of legal concepts and standards under the existing legal framework. At the International Maritime Organization (IMO), work has been underway since 2015 on reviewing the potential implications of maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS) on the different maritime safety, facilitation, and liability and compensation conventions, and in shaping understanding on how autonomous vessels can be accom  modated within the current international legal framework for flag State responsibility. As a competent international organization under the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea, IMO is the forum through which generally accepted international rules and standards on shipping and navigation are developed. Since the initial conduct of regulatory scoping exercises by its Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), Facilitation Committee (FAL) and Legal Committee (LEG), IMO is currently at work on a goal-based non-mandatory MASS Code, setting the framework and high-level standards for the safe operation of MASS. Member States leading the development of autonomous shipping technology also regularly report on findings and observations from early-stage domestic trials and preparatory legislation for the mainstreaming of MASS. This article will look at the early history of IMO’s work on MASS vis-à-vis its rule-making process, and provide a cursory overview of the key issues that have been considered and/or flagged for resolution in the lead-up to the adoption of a legal framework for MASS.

Maja Markovčić Kostelac: EMSA and MASS

To be announced

Melis Ozdel: CMI and MASS

In 2015, the CMI set up an International Working Group to carry out detailed and careful legal analysis of the issues concerning the commercial operation of MASS. For this purpose, the Working Group has taken over various tasks, and it continues to play a key role in laying the groundwork for a legal framework governing MASS and their operation. This chapter will discuss the CMI’s role and the difficulties in regulating an area where the legislative framework is required to stipulate not just what the law currently is but also what it should be.

Henrik Ringbom: Regulatory Challenges Linked to MASS (keynote speech)

The development towards MASS affects almost any type of maritime and shipping law. This article provides a brief overview of the main regulatory challenges linked to MASS at international level. This cover three different regulatory challenges in three different legal contexts. First, there are issues with respect to how MASS fit in the jurisdictional setting of the law of the sea. Important legal issues linked to passage rights of MASS and the flag state’s role and responsibilities with respect to remotely operated ships are raised by the new technological developments. Second, the technical aspects of MASS regulation are currently beginning to take shape in the form of the first drafts of the (voluntary) MASS Code. This field, too, raises new issues from a technical and treaty law point of view, while other IMO matters, such as the links to COLREGs or watchkeeping requirements, are still open. Finally, autonomous ships differ from traditionally operated ships in terms of the relationship between humans and machines, which has important implications for the civil liability regime that should apply for damage caused by MASS. Various options and challenges are briefly addressed.

Murat Sumer: MASS Remote Control Centers – Compliance with UNCLOS and SOLAS

Jurisdiction, which is attributed to the sovereignty of States, is the foundational pillar of international maritime law. Indeed, States are not only conferred rights but also tasked to fulfil various jurisdictional roles such as flag/port/coastal States. UNCLOS give precedence to flag State jurisdiction over ships while it also recognizes the increasing role of port States.

As an umbrella treaty, the Convention lays the legal basis of the aforementioned State jurisdiction in the maritime domain. Nevertheless, as the competent organization for international shipping under the UNCLOS framework, IMO develops comprehensive shipping regulations specifying technical rules and standards. The interoperability of the UNCLOS regime and IMO ensures the adaptation of the regulatory framework addressing the technological advancement. In this context, this paper will address the nexus between IMO`s regulatory mandate and UNCLOS in the context of flag State jurisdiction.

In this context, this Chapter will investigate the potential evolution of flag State jurisdiction for the integration of remotely controlled ships (RCSs) to global shipping, and their implications for flag States. In this vein, the issue of remote operation centres (ROCs) will also be analysed. Whilst doing this, the recent IMO deliberations in the Legal Committee, Maritime Safety Committee and MASS Joint Working Group will also be investigated to shed light on the legal position of IMO Member States.

Upon discussing the legal basis of the flag State jurisdiction and important elements of the autonomy level of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) interacting differently with the regulatory framework, this chapter will explore the exercise of effective flag State jurisdiction as regards ROCs in two different scenarios. First, the ROCs which are located in the flag States and second the ROCs which are situated abroad.

Aref Fakhry – Mazen Sakr: MASS and Maritime Security Law: Focus on Piracy

In line with the vision of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) enter a regulatory field defined by notions of ships with an assumed existence of crews on board.

Maritime security is perhaps a relatively new term of art, but the existence of the perils of the sea, including piracy and armed robbery, goes back to the very early times of maritime and admiralty law. The perils of the sea have been deemed to relate to forces and hazards that could overpower or at least subdue man´s attempts to navigate safely across water. Some presence of humans on board is, nevertheless, deemed necessary.

The same could be said of IMO’s International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code), which was adopted with the idea that some humans would take minimum safeguards on board.

This paper considers the track record of lightly manned vessels and attempts to project lessons learnt in relation to future unmanned variations. The risk from pirates and armed robbers will have to be reckoned with when no one is onboard. The law would have to follow somehow.

The germane but distinct issue of terrorism at sea would need to be demarcated and grasped in this context.

Whereas the general approach to MASS in their four categories advocates a reduction of the size of crews onboard ships up to the point of even eliminating the remote control person, the trend just before the covid crisis was to add security teams to crews when transiting critical and risky areas such as international straits, eg, Bab-el-Mandeb and the Indonesian straits, or near the shores of unstable countries, eg, West Africa and Somalia. It may thus appear that MASS would be more adapted to oceans with high density of traffic on fixed routes far from bottlenecks, such as the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

An analysis is undertaken of the different viewpoints articulated in the debates held under the auspices of IMO on the above questions. It is hoped that the paper could be of assistance in the forthcoming elaboration of an ‘IMO MASS Code’.

Marija Pijaca: MASS and STCW – Emerging Problems with Reference to Seafarers

In the context of use of maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS), a significant challenge is the application of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW Convention) adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). STCW Convention sets out the minimum requirements for education, training and certification that must be met by the signatory states. Among other things, the STCW Convention contains provisions on professional competences in shipping, so every institution that organizes formal education must include the minimum standards set by the Convention in its study programs. In addition to formal education, the STCW Convention contains provisions on training programs that fall under non-formal education and are related to the achievement of professional competencies. Therefore, in terms of education, formal or non-formal, and certification of seafarers, the need to develop new competences of seafarers or upgrade existing ones in terms of trained seafarers for use of MASS is emphasized. The biggest changes associated with the MASS will be to educate seafarers how to navigate, control engine and work with cargo. In addition, the fundamental question will be to regulate the operations of coastal control centers, as well as to define the status of human resources and to answer the question of whether they could also be considered as crewmembers of the ship. Therefore, the aim of this work is to identify the essential competences needed to upgrade the provisions of the STCW Convention in accordance with the development of MASS. The purpose of the work is, therefore, to highlight new problems in relation to seafarers when it comes to MASS and the STCW Convention.

Erik Røsæg: MASS – a challenge for the existing liability systems (keynote speech)

Maritime liability is generally based on negligence. However, autonomous navigation systems are not capable of being negligent. Programmers have this capability, but their liability will be time barred soon after the vessel is built, and they will not have the benefit of global limitation of liability. In some cases, strict liability has been introduced even in maritime law. However, the Collision Convention, 1910, disallows this, and it would perhaps not be appropriate that an autonomous vessel should incur liability even when navigating exactly as a conventional vessel would have navigated. The EU AI liability regime and product liability rules do not resolve these problems. The paper proposes a way forward. However, autonomous ships should not sail without liability for the damage they cause and as well as liability insurance.

Iva Tuhtan Grgić: Liable Person for Collisions Involving MASS

Iva Tuhtan Grgić looks into possible claims' scenarios arising from a collision involving MASS. The Collision Convention 1910 does not point to any particular liable person, leaving the determination of who bears liability for a ship's fault to the applicable national law. The Author explores who could be a possible target of victims' claims, considering all relevant factors, like basis and limitation of liability, available insurance and practical factors related to the burden of proof and costs of court proceedings.

Michael Mišo Mudrić: MASS and Product Liability Issues. Certain aspects of product liability related to autonomous shipping

The European Union is in the process of establishing a regulatory framework for the use of artificial intelligence systems. The normative work includes the Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act), Proposal for a Directive on liability for defective products, and the Proposal for a Directive on adapting non contractual civil liability rules to artificial intelligence. The lecture will analyze the direct and indirect impact of the set legislation on the global efforts to regulate the advanced systems for aiding the navigation and autonomous navigation systems. The special focus will be placed on the role of the so-called backend operators and their role in the responsibility chain.

Igor Vio – Zuzanna Pepłowska-Dąbrowska: Solutions to Problems Arising out of RSEs

Three Committees of the International Maritime Organization conducted an analysis, so-called Regulatory Scoping Exercises (RSEs), of the existing IMO's conventions' adequacy to MASS shipping. They highlighted areas in which amendments to the existing instruments under the purview of the IMO Committees were needed. At its 111th session in April 2024, the Legal Committee decided to limit its discussion solely to the conventions under its purview. This chapter will suggest the way forward with issues identified as problematic by the Legal Committee's RSEs.

Rhidian Thomas: MASS and Marine Insurance Aspects (keynote speech)

It would appear inevitable that the development of autonomous ships will grow in the years to come but in what form and how quickly are currently unknowns. There will be associated insurance obligations and requirements which the insurance markets will be expected to respond to. In this chapter the broad and particular issues touching on the insurance issues are identified and analysed. There is currently significant uncertainty about the precise form autonomous shipping will assume and its relationship to existing national and international systems of ship regulation.  The more the degree of  incorporation into existing regulatory regimes the more favourable the outlook for insurance. At a more particular level the question arises whether the insurance of autonomous ships can be brought within current market standard covers, with logical amendments,  or is it necessary to develop new standard covers. In addressing these themes there will be particular emphasis on H & M insurance and third party liability cover provided by the International Group of P & I Clubs. The significance of the development of autonomous ships, whatever the dimension adopted,  is the emergence of  cyber risks, not a natural marine risk, as a distinctive characteristic of the cover. The constituent risks are many and various, and certainly not inconsequential. Where cover is provided assureds can expect underwriters to insist on conditions/warranties demanding sound, protective and secure management of information and operational technology.

Frank Stevens: Autonomous Ships – Do We Need a MASS Master?

In the shipping world, the Master has traditionally occupied a central role, whose authority on board was only second to that of God (hence the expression 'Master under God').  In recent times, technological developments, and particularly the development of communication technology, have already resulted in a reduction of the Master's authority and a corresponding increase of the role of the ship owner.  The advent of remotely operated and certainly fully autonomous ships puts even further pressure on the position of the Master.  It will, of course, always be possible to appoint a person as 'the Master' of a MASS, but what is this supposed to achieve?  There are, of course, legal issues regarding MASS, but is appointing someone Master of a MASS necessary or the best possible solution to these issues?  Ultimately, the question must be asked whether we really need a MASS Master or whether there are other (better) solutions.

Filippo Lorenzon: MASS and International Trade: Plug and Play?

The paper looks forward into a near future in which fully autonomous vessels are in common use.

The only raison d’etre of commercial ships is to serve international trade and allow commodities and manufactured goods to move freely across continents through the oceans. The legal framework against which the possible success of MASS should be measured is that of international trade and trade finance.

The question this paper is aimed at answering is the following: can MASS be used for shipping goods under a current day sale contract and under a contemporary letter of credit? Would MASS satisfy the definition for ‘ship’ contained in commonly used standard term sale contracts? Would it satisfy the requirements of a standard CIF or FOB Incoterm? Would the contracts for the use of MASS be considered charter parties and bills of lading for the purposes of documentary tender and payment under the UCP 600?

Should the answer to the above questions be in the negative, how much adaptation would the international trade community need to undertake to make MASS a viable alternative to traditional ships?

Barbara Stępień: Autonomous Vessels and the Blue Economy: Striking a Balance between Technological Advancement and Marine Preservation

A dynamic technological development, the advancement of works on artificial intelligence, and the growing demand for “green technologies” have been the main reasons for the intensification of engineers' work on autonomous and unmanned maritime vessels (AUMV) in recent years. Even though AUMV already exists thanks to various ongoing research projects, their unclear legal situation constitutes one of the main obstacles to their global operation.

This Chapter focuses on determining the legal barriers preventing the worldwide operation of AUMV, especially considering their environmental impact. The research contributes to developing a knowledge-based economy and society in Europe by determining the regulatory barriers and proposing regulatory changes. The Chapter analyzes the regulatory status quo of autonomous vessels considering the Blue Economy and the European Green Deal. The research focuses on the legal aspects of investments in environmentally friendly technologies, supporting industry to innovate, rolling out cleaner, cheaper, and healthier forms of private and public transport, and also targets the UN Sustainable Development Goals 8, 9, 13, 14.

The Chapter concludes that an adjustment of the international and national regulations to facilitate the worldwide operation of AUMV is necessary to make the shipping industry less dependent on the human factor, thus increasing the safety and security of the global and European economy. Finally, the accommodation of the AUMV into the existing regulatory framework will enable an innovative adaptive solution to prevent the environmental harm posed by the shipping-related activities.

Ivana Kunda – Danijela Vrbljanac: AI Rocking the Boat – Conflict of Laws for MASS

Technological innovation in the field of artificial intelligence has a huge impact on the maritime industry, including the commercial use of autonomous ships, which may be fully autonomous or controlled remotely. Recognising that this may deeply affect safety of life and property, discussion of regulatory aspects has taken its course within the context of work of various actors, including international organisations, national governments and individual experts. Since the questions of conflict of laws have not been in the focus of these debates, this paper is intended to offer a preliminary insight into the complexities owed to AI-driven ships.

The questions of international jurisdiction and applicable law are analysed primarily from the perspective of international convention and EU private international law to verify to what extent the implementation of AI systems in the autonomous ships in cross-border settings affects the legal status of the parties because they may assume new roles and responsibilities along the AI value chain. Part of the analysis will be devoted to recent preliminary developments in the EU institutions regarding the possible future Regulation concerning civil liability for AI systems. The other part will offer insight into the ability of the traditional rules in the EU private international law structure to accommodate the new technological developments and the way they reflect in the business-organisational scheme in maritime shipping.

Khanssa Langdami: AI, Big Data and their Implications in the Maritime Sector     

Artificial Intelligence (AI), big data, and algorithms are currently at the center of discussions about social transformation. Although the future may seem distant, the potential for technological advancements is already prompting action among innovators, established professionals, customers, and users. This is influencing the dynamics of workplace transformation. Technologies rooted in research, such as machine learning and deep learning, have moved from the realm of laboratories to perform tasks that were previously beyond the capabilities of machines, such as image or voice recognition.

In the maritime industry, the use of AI technology and the associated data is still in its early stages. Apprehensions persist concerning human oversight, liability, and accountability. Notably, certain aspects relating to the evolution of new technologies in the maritime domain have not undergone comprehensive scrutiny. Specifically, the ramifications of AI and big data on maritime workers and how these technologies might impact the way their work is evaluated.

This paper aims to delve into the methods through which governance and regulation can adapt to confront the challenges presented by emerging technologies, including AI and big data. The focus will be on evaluating the existing maritime regulation and policy while concurrently upholding maritime workers rights at sea.

Juan Pablo Delgado: EU Legislation on AI and its Applicability to Autonomous Ships

For several years, international maritime organisations have been developing rules to address the ever-closer scenario of autonomous ships operation, based on four levels of autonomy. Although it is true that, among of these, level 4 (fully autonomous unscrewed ships) seems to be far in time, it is perhaps the one that will pose the greatest regulatory obstacles (on the basis that maritime law has been conceived from its origins on the idea that there was always someone on board controlling/managing the vessel). The development of artificial intelligence, in its different versions, should lead us to consider to what extent this fourth level of autonomy will fit in with current liability rules. In this regard, the European Union (although not leading the technology), has recently developed a set of rules on civil liability for artificial intelligence, which, while not specifically designed for maritime navigation, may have an impact on the liability on fully autonomous ships transport operators. In addition, the IMO continues to work on its efforts towards a MASS Code that seems likely to raise many of the hurdles that levels 2 and 3 would face regarding the navigation of these kind of ships.

Unho Lee: Creating a Regulatory Framework for Integration of AI in the Operation of Autonomous Ships - Recent Developments in Japan and Korea

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in the operation of autonomous ships presents significant legal challenges, particularly concerning liability for decisions made by these intelligent systems. This research paper delves into the recent developments in the regulatory frameworks of Japan and Korea, two leaders in East Asian maritime technology, examining how they could address the liability issues arising from the deployment of autonomous ships. As these jurisdictions advance in maritime AI, they face the imperative task of revising traditional maritime and liability laws, which have not traditionally accounted for non-human decision-makers. The study examines first existing liability regimes and their applicability to autonomous ships, and then evaluates the proposed legal provisions and/or government guidelines in Japan and Korea that might apply to liability issues in the operation of autonomous ships. This analysis highlights the complexities of attributing accountability when AI systems autonomously navigate, manage emergencies, or interact with other seafaring traffic, underlining the need to fill the gap of current legal regimes. This paper advocates for the development of coherent liability norms that can address the unique challenges posed by AI in the maritime industry, proposing recommendations for an enhanced regulatory framework with clear legal definitions and standards specific to AI operations in maritime contexts.