Abstract

Against the backdrop of the COVID-19 outbreak onboard the cruise ship Diamond Princess, both the flag State and the port State should act according to international obligations during the sailing stage, quarantine period after ships’ berthing, and the time when the quarantine period expires. However, the potential danger of the absence of a “genuine link” between the cruise shipowners and the flag State, the lack of coordination of jurisdiction in different sea areas and between different States, and also the lack of special or systematic regulations for infection prevention and control (IPC) at sea and for cruise ships increase the risk of a State’s breach of international obligations. Therefore, it is deemed necessary to improve the responsive measures in international law. This paper, after review and analysis, sheds light on various recommendations on how to improve the responsive measures in international law, including (i) strengthening of the jurisdiction of the flag State, (ii) establishment of a special international cooperation mechanism with an alliance between the WHO and the IMO, and (iii) construction of an IPC mechanism for home ports of cruise ships.

Highlights

  • After the COVID-19 pandemic spread over China and other regions from December2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) listed COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on 31 January 2020, and as a pandemic on 11 March2020 [1]

  • This paper will review the concrete infection prevention and control (IPC) measures taken by States and their effects, in order to analyze (i) whether the actions of these States are in accord with the related international law of the sea, maritime law and pubic health law, and (ii) how to improve the current legal mechanisms to effectively control the spread of infection onboard in future

  • Except on the high seas and internal waters where the port of call for ships is located, the current international law system has no explicit provisions under which the State should bear responsibility when public health emergencies happen on ships in different sea areas

Read more

Summary

Introduction

2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) listed COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) on 31 January 2020, and as a pandemic on 11 March. The aforementioned situation rapidly stirred up international concern as it became a “large-scale human-to-human transmission place outside the land”. While attention was paid to the life and health of the isolated people, many States were more concerned about whether the countermeasures of the relevant States, such as the port State and flag State, were appropriate and sufficient in the context of current international law. This paper will review the concrete infection prevention and control (IPC) measures taken by States and their effects, in order to analyze (i) whether the actions of these States are in accord with the related international law of the sea, maritime law and pubic health law, and (ii) how to improve the current legal mechanisms to effectively control the spread of infection onboard in future

Quarantine Onboard
Virus Detection
Information Release
Evacuation of Nationals
The Isolation Decision Was Not Timely
The Isolation Measures were Not Professional
The Information Disclosure Was Not Transparent
The Sailing Stage of the Cruise Ship
After Reaching the Port
After the Quarantine Expired
The Potential Danger of Registration to the “Genuine Link” Principle
The Lack of Coordination of Jurisdiction in Different Sea Areas and between
Further Improvement of the Rule of Law
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call