Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108) - Anguilla

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of these Conventions on the maritime sector, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 22, 23, and 108 together.

The Committee recalls that, in the framework of the Standards Review Mechanism, the ILO Governing Body, as recommended by the Special Tripartite Committee on the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), classified Conventions Nos 22, 23, and 108 as “outdated”. At its 343rd Session (November 2021), the Governing Body placed an item on the agenda of the 118th Session (2030) of the International Labour Conference concerning the abrogation of Conventions Nos 22 and 23 and requested the Office to encourage once again the Member States which have already ratified the MLC, 2006 but remain bound by Conventions Nos 22 and 23 in respect of non-metropolitan territories, to extend the application of the MLC, 2006 to those territories and to encourage Member States that are still bound by Convention No. 108 to ratify the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003, as amended (No. 185). The Committee, therefore, encourages the Government to consider extending the application of the MLC, 2006 to Anguilla as well as ratifying Convention No. 185 and extending its application to Anguilla.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes with  deep concern  the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Conventions.  In this regard, the Committee refers to the resolution adopted by the Governing Body in its 340th Session ( GB.340/Resolution) concerning maritime labour issues and COVID-19 disease, which calls on Member States to take measures to address the adverse impacts of the pandemic on seafarers’ rights, and requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any temporary measures adopted in this regard, their duration and their impact on seafarers’ rights.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Articles 3–6 of the Convention. Conditions for signing and content of the articles of the agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to these provisions of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government states that (1) Anguilla currently does not have registered vessels of more than 100 tons or 300 cubic metres; (2) according to the Merchant Shipping (Categorisation of Registries of Relevant British Possessions) Order, Anguilla is a Category 2 Shipping Registry under the United Kingdom and therefore, as a general rule, may not register vessels exceeding 150 gross tonnage; (3) the Small Commercial Vessels Regulations implement the Code of Safety for Small Commercial Vessels Operating in the Caribbean published by the International Maritime Organization (IMO); and (4) the Merchant Shipping Act 2010 and the Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Act, 2020 are relevant in this context. The Committee observes, however, that the aforementioned Regulations do not contain any provisions on the seamen’s articles of agreements and that the Act mentioned by the Government does not contain specific provisions giving effect to the Convention. Recalling that only ships of less than 100 gross tonnage may be excluded from the application of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Articles 3 to 6. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on any development concerning the number and tonnage of ships registered in Anguilla.

Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23)

Articles 3–6. Entitlement to repatriation. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to these provisions of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the Merchant Shipping Act 2010 and the Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Act, 2020, which, however, do not contain any provisions on repatriation. Likewise, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Small Commercial Vessels Regulations implement the Code of Safety for Small Commercial Vessels Operating in the Caribbean published by the IMO. The Committee observes, however, that the aforementioned Regulations do not contain any provisions on repatriation. In light of the above, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Articles 3–6 of the Convention.

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108)

Article 6. Permission to enter a territory. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate how it ensures compliance with Article 6. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the Merchant Shipping Act 2010 and the Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Act, 2020 and other national provisions which, however, do not give effect to Article 6. The Committee once again recalls that, according to Article 6, each Member shall permit the entry into a territory for which the Convention is in force of a seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document, when entry is requested for temporary shore leave while the ship is in port. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how it gives effect to this requirement of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes that the Government’s reports on the application of the maritime Conventions contain no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next reports will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct requests. In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues to be addressed in relation to the application of these Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, as follows.

The Committee notes that, based on the recommendations adopted by the Special Tripartite Committee established under the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), in the framework of the review of maritime related instruments, the Governing Body has decided that member States having ratified the MLC, 2006, and still bound by Conventions Nos 22 and 23 in respect of non metropolitan territories, should be encouraged to extend the application of the MLC, 2006, to such territories (see GB.334/LILS/2). In this context, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any further developments concerning the extension of the application of the MLC, 2006, to Anguilla.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Articles 3–6 of the Convention. Conditions for signing and content of the articles of the agreement. The Committee noted in its previous comments the Government’s indication that the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 of the United Kingdom is extended to Anguilla by virtue of section 1(1)(c) of the Act which defines “British ship” as a ship registered under the law of a relevant British possession. It also noted that section 1(3) of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 defines “United Kingdom ship” separately to mean a ship registered in the United Kingdom. However, the Committee has also noted that section 25 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which regulates crew agreements, only refers to persons employed as seamen on a “United Kingdom ship”. The Committee therefore requests once again the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Articles 3–6 of the Convention.

Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23)

Articles 3–6 of the Convention. Entitlement to repatriation. The Committee noted in its previous comments the Government’s indication that the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 of the United Kingdom is extended to Anguilla by virtue of section 1(1)(c) of the Act which defines British ships as ships registered under the law of a relevant British possession. It also noted that section 1(3) of the Act defines United Kingdom ships separately to mean ships registered in the United Kingdom. However, the Committee has already noted that section 73 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which implements the basic requirements of the Convention, refers only to persons employed as seafarers on United Kingdom ships. Therefore, the Committee again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Articles 3–6 of the Convention.

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108)

Article 6. Permission to enter a territory. The Committee requested in its previous comments that the Government indicates how the requirements of this Article of the Convention are complied with. It notes that the Government’s last report provides no information in this regard. The Committee recalls that according to Article 6, each Member shall permit the entry into a territory for which the Convention is in force of a seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document, when entry is requested for temporary shore leave while the ship is in port. If the seafarer’s identity document contains space for appropriate entries, each Member shall also permit the entry into a territory for which the Convention is in force of a seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document when entry is requested for the purpose of: (a) joining his ship or transferring to another ship; (b) passing in transit to join his ship in another country or for repatriation; or (c) any other purpose approved by the authorities of the Member concerned. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to indicate how it gives effect to Article 6 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Articles 2 to 6 of the Convention. Seafarers’ identity documents. The Committee notes that the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 of the United Kingdom is extended to Anguilla by virtue of section 1(1)(c) of the Act, which defines British ships as ships registered under the law of a relevant British possession. It also notes that section 79 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which regulates seafarer’s cards, together with the Merchant Shipping (Seamen’s Documents) Regulations 1987, refer to British seamen, which include seafarers of British overseas territories in accordance with the British Nationality Act 1981 and the British Overseas Territories Act 2002.

While noting that the specimen copy of the seafarer’s identity document provided by the Government, together with its report submitted in 2009, fulfils the requirements of Article 4(2) and (3) of the Convention, the Committee considers that, it is still unclear whether and how the right of entry (Article 6) is implemented. The Committee therefore asks the Government to explain in detail the state of law and practice in this regard and to provide copies of any relevant legislative or regulatory text implementing the above requirement of the Convention.

Finally, the Committee recalls that the present Convention has been revised by the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), which was adopted by the ILO to enhance port and border security, while at the same time facilitating the seafarers’ right to shore leave, by developing a more secure and globally uniform seafarers’ identity document. The Committee therefore requests the Government to consider the possibility of aligning the relevant legislation with the standards set out in Convention No. 185.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Articles 2 to 6 of the Convention. Seafarers’ identity documents. The Committee notes that the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 of the United Kingdom is extended to Anguilla by virtue of section 1(1)(c) of the Act, which defines British ships as ships registered under the law of a relevant British possession. It also notes that section 79 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which regulates seafarer’s cards, together with the Merchant Shipping (Seamen’s Documents) Regulations 1987, refer to British seamen, which include seafarers of British overseas territories in accordance with the British Nationality Act 1981 and the British Overseas Territories Act 2002.

However, while noting that the specimen copy of the seafarer’s identity document provided by the Government, together with its report submitted in 2009, fulfils the requirements of Article 4(2) and (3) of the Convention, the Committee considers that, it is still unclear whether and how the right of entry (Article 6) is implemented. The Committee therefore asks the Government to explain in detail the state of law and practice in this regard and to provide copies of any relevant legislative or regulatory text implementing the above requirement of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply up-to-date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistical information on the number of seafarers’ identity documents issued during the reporting period, extracts from reports of the services entrusted with the enforcement of the relevant laws and regulations, or any difficulties encountered in the application of the Convention, etc.

Finally, the Committee recalls that the present Convention has been revised by the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), which was adopted by the ILO to enhance port and border security, while at the same time facilitating the seafarers’ right to shore leave, by developing a more secure and globally uniform seafarers’ identity document. In fact, Convention No. 185 complements actions taken within the framework of the IMO through the adoption of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS), sets out basic parameters regarding the content and form of the documents, and provides technical guidance in the annexes in order to ensure that Members may easily adapt their systems while taking national circumstances into account. The Committee therefore asks the Government to keep the Office informed of any consideration given toward the effective implementation of Convention No. 185.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Article 6 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that the measures to revise the legislation and thus give effect in law to this Article of the Convention (by authorizing the entry into the territory of seafarers holding a valid seafarers' identity document) have not yet been included in the current legislative agenda. The Committee trusts the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to put the law into line with a practice that, according to the Government, is already in conformity with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

Article 6 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that measures to give effect in law to this Article of the Convention (by authorising the entry into the territory of seafarers holding a valid seafarer's identity document) have still not been taken. The Committee trusts that they will be taken in the very near future in order to harmonise the law with a practice that, according to the Government, is already in accordance with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 6 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that the relevant regulations are currently in the process of being revised so as to allow seafarers holding identity documents into the territory. Since, according to the Government, this is already current practice, and since this question has been the subject of comments by the Committee for many years, the Committee trusts that the Government will be in a position in its next report to indicate the provisions adopted to give effect to this Article.