The 12th meeting of the Advisory Committee of the International Mobile Satellite Organisation (IMSO) was held on 3-4 November in London.
As in previous Committee meetings, this session’s main purpose was to continue preparation of a draft model Public Service Agreement to be signed by IMSO and future satellite service providers under the global maritime distress and safety system (GMDSS), authorised to that end by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO).
The secretariat continued work on the document in question between this Committee meeting and the previous one, co-ordinating with potential new providers and the IMO secretariat; the version now presented has some basic differences with respect to the one from the previous meeting.
The main change concerns the respective roles of IMSO and the IMO in the process of authorising and controlling the new providers, especially from the legal standpoint: the newly presented version allegedly created a clearer distinction between the IMO’s role as a legislator (establishing the legal framework) and IMSO’s role as a regulator (authorising market entry and supervising service provision). This change nevertheless raised serious reservations from some countries, above all because they would like additional legal opinions on the model, but also because same may infringe in some way on the sovereign rights of States as members of the IMO. Another newly introduced item, related to the previous one, is the recourse to a group of experts to assess the system ahead of its initial authorisation. To that end, the Committee requested more details as to that group’s mandate, way of functioning and financing.
Other important aspects of the document that escaped definition since the previous meeting also drew attention. Particularly the question of the IMSO’s future financing, which had already merited some discussion at the previous meeting. In this meeting, the director presented some principles for drawing up and approving the organisation’s budget, which were generally accepted by the Committee. However, he has yet to present a “formula” for sharing those costs between the various providers, which some countries deem to be fundamental. It was also noted that some other significant aspects of the document still needed to be precisely defined, specifically those depending on progress at IMO level. The draft PSA model’s elaboration was thus once again not completed. The secretariat should present detailed proposals on the various open points until the next meeting, so that the text can be completed for presentation to the Extraordinary Assembly planned for December of this year. To that end, an additional Committee meeting has been scheduled for 15-16 November.
The Committee likewise debated a proposal from the director that the extraordinary Assembly should be able to adopt an amendment to the IMSO Convention that allows the organisation to perform duties beyond its current ones, particularly the supervision of a future long distance vessel identification and localisation system, by delegation from the IMO, as with GMDSS. This is not included in the set of amendments approved in principle by the 17th Assembly, whose formal adoption should take place at the said extraordinary Assembly, along with the draft PSA and other associated documentation. As such, some countries, among them Portugal, expressed their opposition to adoption of the amendment proposed in the extraordinary Assembly, given that it went against the Convention provisions on amendments (this does not however imply opposition to IMSO performing such duties). The Assembly may alternatively be questioned on whether to accept or not perform such functions upon IMO request, with realisation of same subject to the adoption at a future Assembly of IMSO Convention amendments to that end. Some countries continue to have some reservations about involving IMSO in this activity, specifically because the process is still being developed in the IMO.
Lastly, the date of the Extraordinary Assembly, scheduled for December 2005, generated a great deal of controversy. Some countries, among them Portugal, hold that many important aspects remain open, in the draft PSA and others directly related to same. This may hinder the timely conclusion for submission to the Assembly of the package of instruments the latter should adopt together with the Convention amendments. They also consider that the urgent need to adopt the IMSO Convention amendments is not evident, because the calendar at IMO level will be even more behind schedule. As such, the decision of the December Assembly will not reflect the final version of the related instruments eventually adopted by the IMO. To that end, they proposed that the Extraordinary Assembly be postponed for two or three months. However, given the major pressure from the director to hold the Assembly in December, supported by some countries, the Committee decided to maintain the previously scheduled date (14-16 December).
