Connect with us


‘Place of refuge’ – the international debate



By Capt. Ranjith Weerasinghe

Ships are built to conform to highest safety standards under the guidelines of the International Maritime Organisations (IMO). The stringent regulatory regime is further reinforced by the latest technology in modern day ships in ship design, building, operations, maintenance, management and competency of crew. However, there will always be ships in distress, regardless of what stringent regulatory regimes are followed as has been the case ever since man took to water transportation even before the invention of the wheel. When a ship is in distress, absolutely helpless at sea, help is inevitably sought by the ship’s captain. A distressed vessel struggles to get to the nearest coastal state for a place of refuge, and the denial of entry can lead to disaster. If a ship’s captain requested assistance in case of a peril at sea, and all the ports in the world decides not to take the ship to a place of refuge, what would the world expect the ships’ crew to do?

Historically and traditionally, ships in distress have been given whatever help by vessels in the vicinity and the coastal states authorities when they happen to be in coastal waters. Help includes providing a sheltered place to manage the problem, to prevent it from further deterioration, assist the crew, provide repair facility, transfer cargo, firefighting, salvage, towage, or assistance to save lives and property and protect the environment. But with notable oil tanker disasters resulting in unprecedented environment pollution incidents, by mid 70s, the coastal states became more concerned about granting place of refuge to vessels in distress in danger of fire, explosion, grounding, sinking, etc,. As a result, there is an ongoing international debate and a proposal for introducing an international law to grant ‘place of refuge”. This debate received international attention in early 2000 when several incidents took place due to the “refusal or denial of place of refuge”. One was Motor Tanker Erika in Dec 1999; it broke in two and sank off the coast of France and the other was MT Prestige in 2002, which broke up and sank off the coast of Spain; both vessels had been denied place of refuge and they caused extensive environmental damage. Similarly, a tanker named MT Castor with a structural failure could not find a place of refuge and was towed around in the Mediterranean Sea for more than a month. Finally, the Salvors removed the cargo oil at sea by ships to ship transfer and saved the vessel.

Against this backdrop, there was a compelling need for IMO to seek an agreement amongst member states to make a law with respect to “place of refuge”. Up to date it has not materialised due to concerns of coastal states. Short of such an agreement, the best the IMO could do was to adopt two resolutions in 2003, and they relate to vessels in distress or needing assistance:

1. A949 (23);

Intended for use when a vessel is in distress and cannot be left in the place without moving to safety

2. A950 (23)

Requiring all coastal states to establish a Maritime Assistance Service.



Besides oil tanker fires, in recent times there have been fires on board container ships. The international insurance industry says one container ship fire occurs every two weeks somewhere in the world. In recent times, container ships MSC Flaminia, Maersk Honam, and Yantian Express suffered heavy damage and loss of life due to fire, and a long time was taken to find a place of refuge for it to discharge the cargo. A fire on board a container vessel is first a risk to the seafarers and the environment and secondly entails a very heavy economic cost–first, the cost of firefighting, salvage, towage and damage to the ship and cargo, and secondly, the cost of the ‘cargo related business interruptions’, which affects industries dependent on ‘just-in-time’ logistics.

Although there has been no instance of denial of ‘place of refuge’ in Sri Lanka, ships passing through its territorial waters are always in probable, unintended “place of refuge”. We also have had a few incidents of vessels in distress off our coast over the years. Whether we offer a place of refuge or not, as a coastal state, we have an obligation to be prepared to assist any distressed vessel. Such preparedness is critical and essential not only in view of the assistance sought by the vessels in trouble but also to avert probable environmental disasters that follow if the timely and effective assistance is not provided. In the said international context, Sri Lanka’s emergency preparedness for such contingencies is to be examined in response to MAS 950(23) Resolution.

The case of the fire-stricken X-Press Pearl at Colombo anchorage and the fire on board MT New Diamond tanker off the East coast of Sri Lanka provide lessons. In both cases it was so sad to see two marvelous ships being engulfed in a fire for days and the crew members suffering injury. Fortunately, New Diamond with 300,000MT crude oil did not lead to an environment disaster. But X-Press Pearl did.

In the case of X-Press Pearl, the following have been reported in the media:

Long before the vessel arrived in Sri Lanka its crew had noticed an acid leak from a container after leaving Jebel Ali in the UAE for Hamad in Qatar. In Hamad, the ship’s captain requested the discharge of the container, but his request was turned down.


Leaving the Hamad port, the Captain asked the ship owners to arrange for return to Jebel Ali to discharge the container, but the owners thought such action was not necessary as arrangements were expected at next port Hazira in Gujarat. The Port of Hazira refused to discharge the container at issue. Finally, the vessel arrived in Colombo as the next scheduled port and not as ‘a port of refuge’.

Some of the questions that Sri Lanka should ask in general are as follows;

In the case of vessel requesting a ‘a place of Refuge’, do we have an evaluation mechanism to make right conclusions? Do we have a well thought-out emergency response plan in place?

In the case of vessel needing assistance, are we ready to honour our international obligations to provide assistance as regards fires, imminent danger of grounding or sinking, preventing actual or probable environmental disasters, salvage and towage, calls for urgent medical emergencies.

While promoting Sri Lanka as a ‘maritime hub’, have we given serious thought to these aspects.

As for the X-PRESS PEARL incident, we should examine the following:

At the time the X-Press Pearl reported a presence of Nitric acid leaking container, and subsequently signs of fire inside container, did the authorities concerned carry out any assessment and evaluation with a view to taking necessary action?

Did the authorities have the information about the cargo on board the distressed ship—argo manifest and stowage plan – reference bay plan)?

Did the fire erupt in the container with 25MT of Nitric acid, which by nature is not flammable by itself but a highly corrosive oxidant in the Class 8 in the “International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code” (IMDG Code); if it leaks into other combustible materials, that can catch fire and become explosive.

If the Captain of the vessel had reported that the particular container identified from cargo manifest with nitric acid was leaking and there was a yellow fume, what should have been the evaluation? For example, in India, dangerous cargo cannot be handled without the approval of the DG Shipping as the highest state official of the sector, but in Sri Lanka it is left to the Ports Authority to take the relevant action

The vessel arrived at the Colombo Anchorage in early hours of 20 May 2021, and for two three days a yellow smoke had been emanating from the ship, according to media reports. Nitric acid must have leaked and mixed with something else, causing the fire.

If it is true that the issue was initially confined to that particular container with a manageable nitric acid leak, what prevented the SLPA from taking action to berth the nearly brand new vessel on priority basis and remove the container without waiting for her scheduled berthing slot? If we lack facilities to do so, we have to acquire them. If not, ships will face disasters for no fault of theirs as no ship crew or master inspects the stowage of cargo inside a container; it is left in the hands of shore authorities.



As for MT New Diamond, when the incident took place about 20 miles off East Coast of Sri Lanka, with 300,000 MT of crude oil, we realised a few shortcomings, but do not seem to have learnt any lessons as can be seen from the following among others:

* Absence of a “responsible authority” prescribed by Merchant Shipping Act to take charge of the situation in the event of any maritime emergency

* Absence of an effective Emergency Response Plan,

* Absence of defined roles for DGMS, MEPA, SL NAVY, SLPA, NARA, etc.,

* Absence of Defined Emergency Facilities from other agencies such as Airports, Customs, Immigration, local government authorities, etc.,

* Absence of proper and sufficient facilities for such emergency response.

(Notably we did not have firefighting capability, especially with large volume high expansion foam system with high pressure pump that could be fitted on a tug with storage of at least 100 CBM foam in 1CBM Intermediate Bulk tanks that can be loaded on to supporting vessels).

* Lack of trained salvage team and equipment at the disposal of the responsible authority

* Non-availability of a mechanism to mobilise enlisted supporting vessels, equipment and personnel.

* Absence of a responsible communication mechanism

* Lack of rewarding structure for all involved in the rescue effort


Most of all, action must be taken to enhance the reputation of the country as a capable maritime nation which in turn helps the Sri Lankan maritime industry.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


What JVP-NPP needs to do to win



A JVP protest


A young academic at the Open University writing on a popular website has recently defined the NPP project as ‘Left populist’, a term which is very familiar to us at least from the writings of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe. He also mentions several parallels and precursors internationally.

As one who has been advocating a ‘left populist’ project for years, I am disinclined to nit-pick about whether or not the JVP-NPP fits the bill. At the moment and in its current incarnation, it is indeed the closest we have to a ‘left populist’ project. Its competitor the SJB, which its founder-leader identifies as social democratic, would be as approximate –and as loose– a fit for the labels ‘progressive populist’, ‘moderate populist’ or ‘populist centrist’, as the JVP-NPP is for ‘left populist’. But that’s the deck of cards we have.

The points I seek to make are different, and may be said to boil down to a single theme or problematique.

Distorted Left Populism

My argument is that the JVP-NPP is as distant from ‘left populism’ globally as it was from ‘left revolutionism’ globally in an earlier incarnation. In both avatars, it is unique in its leftism but not in a positive or helpful way for its cause at any given time.

Mine is not intended as a damning indictment of the JVP-NPP. It is intended as a constructive criticism of a rectifiable error, the rectification of which is utterly urgent given the deadly threat posed by the Wickremesinghe administration and its project of dependent dictatorship.

The JVP-NPP has a structural absence that no ‘left populist’ enterprise, especially in Latin America, has ever had. It is an absence that has marked the JVP from its inception and has been carried over into the present NPP project.

It is not an absence unique to the JVP but figures more in Sri Lanka than it has almost anywhere else. I say this because the same ‘absence’ characterised the LTTE as well. In short, that factor or its radical absence has marred the anti-systemic forces of South and North on the island.

The homeland of left populism has been Latin America while its second home has been Southern Europe. With the exception of Greece, it may be said that ‘left populism’ has an Ibero-American or culturally Hispanic character, which some might trace to the ‘romanticism’ of that culture. But such considerations need not detain us here.

‘Left populism’ has had several identifiable sources and points of departure: the former guerrilla movements of the 1960s and 1970s; the non-guerrilla movements of resistance to dictatorships; parties and split-offs from parties of the Marxist left; left-oriented split-offs or the leftwing of broad flexible even centrist populist formations; leftwing experiments from within the militaries etc.

Populism, Pluralism & Unity

Despite this diversity, all experiments of a Left populist character in Latin America and Europe, have had one thing in common: various forms of unity – e.g., united fronts, blocs etc.—of political parties. I would take up far too much space if I were to list them, starting with the Frente Amplio (which means precisely ‘Broad Front’) initiated by the Tupamaros-MLN of Uruguay and containing the Uruguayan Communist party and headed by a military man, General Liber Seregni, in 1970. The Frente Amplio lasted through the decades of the darkest civil-military dictatorship up to the presidential electoral victories of Tabaré Vasquez and Mujica respectively. Another example would be El Salvador’s FMLN, which brought together several Marxist guerrilla movements into a single front under the stern insistence of Fidel Castro.

Though the roots of unity were back in the 1970s, the formula has only been strengthened in the 1990s and 21st century projects of Left populism. There is a theoretical-strategic logic for this. The polarisation of ‘us vs them’, the 99% vs. the 1%, the many not the few—in socioeconomic terms—is of course a hallmark of populism. But pro-NPP academics and ideologues are unaware of or omit its corollary everywhere from Uruguay to Greece and Spain. Namely, that socioeconomic ‘majoritarianism’ is not possible with a single party as agency.

When the JVP and the NPP have the same leader, and the JVP leader was the founder of the NPP, I cannot regard it as a truly autonomous project, but a party project. Left populism globally, from its inception right up to Lula last year, is predicated on the admission of political, not just social plurality, and the fact that socioeconomic, i.e., popular majoritarianism is possible only as a pluri-party united front, platform or bloc.

This recognition of the imperative of unity as necessitating a convergence of political fractions and currents; that unity is impossible as a function of a single political party; that authentic majoritarianism i.e., “us” is possible only if “we” converge and combine as an ensemble of our organic political agencies, is a structural feature of Left Populism.

It is radically absent in the JVP-NPP and has been so from the JVP’s founding in 1965. It was also true of the LTTE.

It is this insistence on political unipolarity (to put it diplomatically) or political monopoly (to put it bluntly) is a genetic defect of the JVP which has been carried over into the NPP project.

I do not say this to contest the leading role and the main role that the JVP has earned in any left populist project. I say it to draw the Gramscian distinction between ‘leadership’ and ‘domination’. Only ‘leadership’ can create consensus and popular consent; domination through monopoly cannot.

The simple truth is that however ‘left populist’ you think you are; no single party can be said to represent the people or even a majority – as distinct from a mere plurality– of the people. Furthermore, the people are not a unitary subject, and therefore cannot have a unitary leadership. This is the importance of Fidel Castro’s insistence to the Latin American Left of a ‘united command’ which brings together the diverse segments of the left by reflecting plurality.

Anyone who knows the history of Syriza and Podemos knows that they are not outcrops of some single party of long-standing but the result of an organic process of convergences of factions.

Had the JVP had a policy of united fronts – within the Southern left and with the Northern left– it would not have been as decisively defeated as it was in its two insurrections, and might have even succeeded in its second attempt. Though it has formed the NPP which has brought some significant success, it is still POLITICALLY sectarian in that it has no political alliances, partnerships, i.e., NO POLITICAL RELATIONSHIPS outside of itself.

I must emphasize that here I am not speaking of a bloc with the SJB, though it is most desirable, to be recommended, and if this were Latin America would definitely be on the agenda of discussion.

Post-Aragalaya Left

Let us speak frankly. The most important phenomenon of recent times (since the victorious end of the war) was the Aragalaya of last year. The JVP, especially its student front the SYU, participated in that massive uprising which dislodged President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, but it played a less decisive role in the Aragalaya than did the FSP and the IUSF which is close to it. This is by no means to say that the FSP led the Aragalaya, but to point out that it played a more decisive role – which included some mistakes– than did the JVP.

How then does one remain blind to the fact that the JVP-NPP’s ‘left populism’ does not include the FSP and by extension the IUSF? How can there be a ‘popular bloc’ – a key element of left populism—without the IUSF?

Given that Pubudu Jayagoda, Duminda Nagamuwa, Lahiru Weerasekara and Wasantha Mudalige are among the most successful public communicators today (especially on the left), what kind of ‘left’ is a ‘left populism’ devoid of their presence, participation and contribution?

What does it take to recognise that unity of some sort of these two streams of the Left could result in a most useful division of labour and a quantum leap in the hopes and morale of the increasingly left-oriented post-Aragalaya populace, especially the youth?

Surely the very sight of a platform with the leaders of the JVP-NPP and the FSP-IUSF (AKD and Kumar Gunaratnam, Eranga Gunasekara and Wasantha Mudalige, Wasantha Samarasinghe and Duminda Nagamuwa, Bimal Ratnayake and Pubudu Jayagoda) will take the Left populist project to the next level?

As a party the JVP from its birth, and by extension, the NPP today, have set aside one of the main weapons of leftist theory, strategy and political practice: the United Front. Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Dimitrov, Gramsci, Togliatti, Ho Chi Minh, Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro have founded and enriched this strategic concept.

It is difficult to accept that Rohana Wijeweera and Anura Kumara Dissanayake knew/know better than these giants, and that the JVP-NPP can dispense with this political sword and shield and yet prevail–or even survive the coming storm.

The JVP must present a LEFT option in the leadership of which is the major shareholder; not merely a JVP option or para-JVP option, which is what the NPP is. A credible, viable Left alternative cannot be reduced to a single party and its front/auxiliary; it cannot but be a United Left – a Left Front– alternative.


[Dr Dayan Jayatilleka is author of The Great Gramsci: Imagining an Alt-Left Project, in ‘On Public Imagination: A Political & Ethical Imperative’ eds Richard Falk et al, Routledge, New York, 2019.]

Continue Reading


Obtaining fresh mandate unavoidable requirement



Protesters demanding local goverment elections

by Jehan Perera

The government’s plans for reviving the economy show signs of working out for the time being. The long-awaited IMF loan is about to be granted. This would enable the government to access other loans to tide over the current economic difficulties. The challenge will be to ensure that both the old loans and new ones will be repayable. To this end the government has begun to implement its new tax policy which increases the tax burden significantly on income earners who can barely make ends meet, even without the taxes, in the aftermath of the rise in price levels. The government is also giving signals that it plans to downsize the government bureaucracy and loss-making state enterprises. These are reforms that may be necessary to balance the budget, but they are not likely to gain the government the favour of the affected people. The World Bank has warned that many are at risk of falling back into poverty, with 40 percent of the population living on less than 225 rupees per person per day.

The problem for the government is that the economic policies, required to stabilize the economy, are not popular ones. They are also politically difficult ones. The failure to analyse the past does not help us to ascertain reasons for our failures and also avoids taking action against those who had misused, or damaged, the system unfairly. The costs of this economic restructuring, to make the country financially viable, is falling heavily, if not disproportionately, on those who are middle class and below. Fixed income earners are particularly affected as they bear a double burden in being taxed at higher levels, at a time when the cost of living has soared. Unlike those in the business sector, and independent professionals, who can pass on cost increases to their clients, those in fixed incomes find it impossible to make ends meet. Emigration statistics show that over 1.2 million people, or five percent of the population, left the country, for foreign employment, last year.

The economic hardships, experienced by the people, has led to the mobilization of traditional trade unions and professionals’ organisations. They are all up in arms against the government’s income generation, at their expense. Last week’s strike, described as a token strike, was successful in that it evoked a conciliatory response from the government. Many workers did not keep away from work, perhaps due to the apprehension that they might not only lose their jobs, but also their properties, as threatened by one government member, who is close to the President. There was a precedent for this in 1981 when the government warned striking workers that they would be sacked. The government carried out its threat and over 40,000 government officials lost their jobs. They and their families were condemned to a long time in penury. The rest of society went along with the repression as the government was one with an overwhelming mandate from the people.


The striking unions have explained their decision to temporarily discontinue their strike action due to President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s willingness to reconsider their economic grievances. More than 40 trade unions, in several sectors, joined the strike. They explained they had been compelled to resort to strike action as there was no positive response from the government to their demands. Due to the strike, services such as health, posts, and railways were affected. Workers in other sectors, including education, port, power, water supply, petroleum, road development, and banking services, also joined the strike. The striking unions have said they would take up the President’s offer to discuss their concerns with the government and temporarily called a halt to their strike action. This would give the government an opportunity to rethink its strategy. Unlike the government in 1981 this one has no popular mandate. In the aftermath of the protest movement, it has only a legal mandate.

So far, the government has been unyielding in the face of public discontent. Public protests have been suppressed. Protest leaders have been arrested and price and tax hikes have gone ahead as planned. The government has been justifying the rigid positions it has been taking on the basis of its prioritization of economic recovery for which both political stability and financial resources are necessary. However, by refusing to heed public opinion the government has been putting itself on a course of confrontation with organized forces, be they trade unions or political parties. The severity of the economic burden, placed on the larger section of society, even as other sectors of society appear to be relatively unaffected, creates a perception of injustice that needs to be mitigated. Engaging in discussion with the trade unions and reconsidering its approach to those who have been involved in public protests could be peace making gestures in the current situation.

On the other hand, exacerbating the political crisis is the government’s continuing refusal to hold the local government elections, as scheduled, on two occasions now by the Elections Commission and demanded by law. The government’s stance is even in contradiction to the Supreme Court’s directives that the government should release the financial resources necessary for the purpose leading to an ever-widening opposition to it. The government’s determination to thwart the local government elections stems from its pragmatic concerns regarding its ability to fare well at them. Public opinion polls show the government parties obtaining much lower support than the opposition parties. Except for the President, the rest of the government consists of the same political parties and government members that faced the wrath of the people’s movement a year ago and had to resign in ignominy.


The government’s response to the pressures it is under has been to repress the protest movement through police action that is especially intolerant of street protests. It has also put pressure on state institutions to conform to its will, regardless of the law. The decisions of the Election Commission to set dates for the local government elections have been disregarded once, and the elections now appear to have to be postponed yet again. The government is also defying summons upon its ministers by the Human Rights Commission which has been acting independently to hold the government to account to the best extent it can. The government’s refusal to abide by the judicial decision not to block financial resources for election purposes is a blow to the rule of law that will be to the longer-term detriment of the country. These are all negative trends that are recipes for future strife and lawlessness. These would have long term and unexpected implications not to the best for the development of the country or its values.

There are indications that President Wickremesinghe is cognizant of the precariousness of the situation. The accumulation of pressures needs to be avoided, be it for gas at homes or issues in the country. As an experienced political leader, student of international politics, he would be aware of the dangers posed by precipitating a clash involving the three branches of government. A confrontation with the judiciary, or a negation of its decisions, would erode the confidence in the entire legal system. It would damage the confidence of investors and the international community alike in the stability of the polity and its commitment to the rule of law. The public exhortations of the US ambassador with regard to the need to conduct the local government elections would have driven this point home.

It is also likely that the US position on the importance of holding elections on time is also held by the other Western countries and Japan. Sri Lanka is dependent on these countries, still the wealthiest in the world, for its economic sustenance, trade and aid, in the form of concessional financing and benefits, such as the GSP Plus tariff concession. Therefore, the pressures coming from both the ground level in the country and the international community, may push the government in the direction of elections and seeking a mandate from the people. Strengthening the legitimacy of the government to govern effectively and engage in problem solving in the national interest requires an electoral mandate. The mandate sought may not be at the local government level, where public opinion polls show the government at its weakest, but at the national level which the President can exercise at his discretion.

Continue Reading


Sing-along… Down Memory Lane



Sing-alongs have turned out to be hugely popular, in the local showbiz scene, and, I would say, it’s mainly because they are family events, and also the opportunity given to guests to shine, in the vocal spotlight, for a minute, or two!

I first experienced a sing-along when I was invited to check out the famous Rhythm World Dance School sing-along evening.

It was, indeed, something different, with Sohan & The X-Periments doing the needful, and, today, Sohan and his outfit are considered the No.1 band for sing-along events.

Melantha Perera: President of Moratuwa Arts Forum

I’m told that the first ever sing-along concert, in Sri Lanka, was held on 27th April, 1997, and it was called Down Memory Lane (DML), presented by the Moratuwa Arts Forum (MAF),

The year 2023 is a landmark year for the MAF and, I’m informed, they will be celebrating their Silver Jubilee with a memorable concert, on 29th April, 2023, at the Grand Bolgoda Resort, Moratuwa.

Due to the Covid pandemic, their sing-along series had to be cancelled, as well as their planned concert for 2019. However, the organisers say the delayed 25th Jubilee Celebration concert is poised to be a thriller, scheduled to be held on 29th April, 2023.

During the past 25 years, 18 DML concerts had been held, and the 25th Jubilee Celebration concert will be the 19th in the series.

Famous, and much-loved, ‘golden oldies’, will be sung by the audience of music lovers, at this two and a half hours programme.

Down Memory Lane was the brainchild of musician Priya Peiris, (of ‘Cock-a-Doodle-Do’ fame) and the MAF became the pioneers of sing-along concerts in Sri Lanka.

The repertoire of songs for the 25th Jubilee Celebration concert will include a vast selection of international favourites, Cowboy and old American Plantation hits, Calypsos, Negro Spirituals, everybody’s favourites, from the ’60s and ’70s era, Sinhala evergreens, etc.

Down Memory Lane


Fun time for the audience Down Memory Lane

Singers from the Moratuwa Arts Forum will be on stage to urge the audience to sing. The band Echo Steel will provide the musical accompaniment for the audience to join in the singing, supported by Brian Coorey, the left handed electric bass guitarist, and Ramany Soysa on grand piano.

The organisers say that every participant will get a free songbook. There would also be a raffle draw, with several prizes to be won,

Arun Dias Bandaranaike will be the master of ceremonies.

President of the Moratuwa Arts Forum, Melantha Perera, back from Australia, after a successful tour, says: “All music lovers, especially Golden Oldies enthusiasts, are cordially invited to come with their families, and friends, to have an enjoyable evening, and to experience heartwarming fellowship and bonhomie.”

Further details could be obtained from MAF Treasurer, Laksiri Fernando (077 376 22 75).

Continue Reading