What advantage a state has for ratifying a convention ?

Let us understand this by considering a hypothetical situation. Let us assume that India has not ratified MARPOL convention. There will be further two situations in this assumption.

  • India would have its own pollution prevention rules
  • India does not have any pollution prevention rules

In the first case, there would be lesser ships eligible to enter in India which would mean higher costs for cargo transportation. India would not want that.

In the second case, the coastline of the country would be at a higher risk of oil pollution. India would not want that either.

In the third case, India can implement same rules as Marpol without ratifying it. This would be an illogical thing to do because if there is nothing in a convention that a state has to object, ratifying a convention would bring better cooperation among other states that have ratified the convention. 

Satyajit Dilip

Satyajit Dilip

Jan 4, 2018

Also to in your article about CLC and Fund Convention, the advantage in this case is if a state has not ratified these 2 conventions and if there is a oil pollution is caused any a vessel along its coastline and if that vessel falls under the exceptions of the CLC & Fund convention clauses, the the State may not be able to get compensation for the damage caused from the IOPC fund, since it has not ratified this convention. This can be a clear example of advantage of ratifying a convention.