By Jean Christou
CYPRUS IS under fire from the EU Commission for its failure to adopt national legislation on penalties against those responsible for maritime pollution.
The European Commission said yesterday it was sending reasoned opinions to Cyprus and seven other member states for their failure to adopt the 2005 directive. A reasoned opinion is one step away from the European Court of Justice.
But the Cyprus Shipping Council (CSC) said yesterday the directive was faulty, had been cobbled together hastily, and that the Cyprus parliament had decided not to adopt it into national legislation. It should have been adopted in April this year.
The contentious directive aims at improving maritime safety and enhancing the protection of the marine environment from pollution by ships.
According to the Commission, it implements international standards for ship-source pollution into Community law, and defines ship-source discharges of polluting substances at sea as infringements when committed with intent, recklessness or serious negligence and calls for adequate penalties to be imposed to all persons responsible for such discharges.
But CSC general secretary Thomas Kazakos said yesterday said the shipping communities of a number of member states would be detrimental to the maritime industry. Cyprus has the third largest shipping registry in the EU after Greece and Malta.
Kazakos said while the shipping community did not have an objection to penalties for ship pollution through negligence or intent, he said the word “reckless” as used in the directive could be used to encompass authentic accidents. He also said current legislation already covered penalties based on international regulations.
“This directive was rushed and a number of countries tried to stop it,” he said. “It’s a killer as an incentive for seafarers entering the profession and particularly now we have a shortage problem.” He said the directive would kill the EU shipping industry.
Kazakos said the directive had been challenged by a group of large ship owners who managed to obtain a ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), not on its content, but on the hurried way it was passed, and that it should be re-drafted.
When the directive came before the Cyprus parliament, voting was delayed on the issue because the ECJ decision was still pending. “When it was discussed in parliament we opposed it,” said Kazakos. “We convinced them in view of the pending decision but what has happened since with the ECJ ruling, had vindicated those countries which opposed it”.
He said he believed yesterday’s notice of a reasoned opinion was merely procedural on the part of the Commission.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment