Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108) - Sri Lanka (Ratification: 1995)

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Possession. For a number of years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the seafarers’ identity document remains in the seafarer’s possession at all times, as required by this Article of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s report which indicates that the existing Continuous Discharge Certificate (CDC) should remain in the seafarer’s possession at all times but legislation supporting this statement has not been specified. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislation which provides for the CDC to remain in the seafarer’s possession at all times.

Article 4(2). Statement. In its previous observations, the Committee had requested the Government to include a statement in the CDC that it is for the purposes of this Convention, as required under Article 4(2) of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report indicating that the Ministry of Ports and Shipping and the Merchant Shipping secretariat are in the process of initiating the project of upgrading the CDC. The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the CDC includes a statement that it is for the purposes of this Convention and to provide a specimen (not a photocopy) of the upgraded document.

Article 6. Permission of entry. In its previous observations, the Committee requested the Government to take prompt action to ensure that the seafarer has the right to enter a territory for temporary shore leave or for joining a ship with a valid identity document, as stated in Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that the existing CDC should be used to enter a territory for temporary leave or for joining a ship, but legislation supporting this statement has not been specified. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislation which provides seafarers holding a valid CDC with the right to enter a territory for temporary leave or for joining a ship.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that measures to ratify both the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), and the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), have begun. In this regard, the Committee recalls that Article 9 of Convention No. 185 provides for the provisional application of this Convention with a view to its ratification. The objective of this provision is to allow the countries party to the Convention to move forward with the adoption of the new seafarers’ identity document in order to achieve universal use and recognition of that document. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress achieved in this respect.

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

Articles 3, 4 and 6 of the Convention. Seafarers’ identity documents. For several years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the continuous discharge certificate book, provided for in section 127(1)(r) of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1971, fails to give effect to substantive requirements of the Convention. In its last report, the Government refers to a Tripartite Steering Committee set up in 2008 on the occasion of a national workshop held with the assistance of the ILO in order to review the gaps identified between the national legislation and the provisions of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), and the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), and ascertain the feasibility of ratification of those instruments. The Government also indicates that the Tripartite Steering Committee intends to take fully into account the Committee’s comments although to date no final decisions have been taken on the revision of the continuous discharge certificate book. While recognizing that countries ratifying Convention No. 185 may need a few years to put in place the facilities and systems necessary for the issuance of seafarers’ identity documents, especially in view of the highly technical character of certain requirements and recommended procedures, the Committee considers that the provisions of Convention No. 108 call for much less cumbersome measures for their implementation. Referring to its previous comments, therefore, the Committee asks the Government to take prompt action in order to bring its law and practice into line with the Convention, in particular as regards: (i) the requirement that the seafarer’s identity document should remain in his or her possession at all times (Article 3); (ii) the statement that should be included in the seafarer’s identity document to the effect that this is a document issued pursuant to ILO Convention No. 108 (Article 4(2)); and (iii) the right of a seafarer with a valid identity document to enter a territory for temporary shore leave or for joining a ship (Article 6). The Committee also asks the Government to indicate any progress made towards the ratification of Convention No. 185 based on the work of the Tripartite Steering Committee.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

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 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to “every seafarer engaged in any capacity on board a vessel”. Section 324 of the Merchant Shipping Act excludes officers from the definition of “seaman” and thus from the scope of persons covered by the continuous discharge certificate (cf. section 6 of the Merchant Shipping Regulations, 1980). The Committee again requests the Government to bring the legislation governing seafarers’ identity documents into conformity with the requirements of the Convention by making it applicable to officers.

Article 2. Application for issuance of documents. The Committee notes the standard procedure for issuing continuous discharge certificates as described by the Government. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether, in practice, the seafarer personally applies for the certificate or whether it is issued at the request of a manning agency or shipping company.

Article 3. Possession. The Committee recalls that according to this provision of the Convention, the seafarers’ identity document shall remain in the seafarer’s possession at all times. On page 3 of the specimen supplied by the Government, it is, however, provided that the certificate shall be given into the safekeeping of the master. The Government confirms that, until joining ship, it is the seafarer who holds the continuous discharge certificate, and that, after the engagement, the master takes it back as a policy. The Committee again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the seafarers’ identity document remains in the seafarer’s possession at all times, as required by this Article of the Convention.

Article 4(2). Statement. Referring to the Committee’s previous comment on the lack of a statement in the continuous discharge certificate indicating that the document is a seafarers’ identity document for the purpose of this Convention, the Committee notes the Government’s reply that these observations are noted and action would be pursued. The Committee trusts that the requisite statement will soon be incorporated in the seafarers’ identity document and requests the Government to provide a sample of such document.

Article 6(1) and (2). Permission of entry. In the absence of a response to its previous comment, the Committee again requests the Government to describe in detail by what means it is ensured that a seafarer holding a valid seafarers’ identity document issued by the competent authority of another State party, is permitted to enter Sri Lankan territory, when entry is requested for the purposes of shore leave or transit. Please also describe the evidence required from a seafarer before permitting entry into Sri Lankan territory and indicate what time limit, if any, has been fixed for the seafarer’s stay.

The Committee points out that while many States parties to the Convention use their continuous discharge certificate as the identity document, the purpose and function of a continuous discharge certificate and an identity document are fundamentally different and the regulations governing the continuous discharge certificate must at least satisfy the obligations set forth in the Convention. This is not the case at present. In view of the difficulties that Sri Lanka is experiencing with bringing its continuous discharge certificate in line with the Convention, in order to satisfy the requirements of a seafarers’ identity document, the Committee suggests to establish a separate seafarers’ identity document, preferably fulfilling the requirements of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). This would bring the situation in line with the latest international developments and ensure continued access of Sri Lankan seafarers to international ports. The Committee trusts that the Office is available to provide technical assistance to that end, should the Government so request.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Articles 2 and 4 of the Convention. Seafarers’ identity documents. The Committee notes that the continuous discharge certificate issued to seafarers by Sri Lankan authorities fails to give effect to substantial provisions of the Convention. The Committee recalls that all obligations concerning identity documents pursuant to the Convention are applicable, irrespective of the denomination of the document or its other uses. It notes that, 15 years after ratification, the Government has not yet taken the required steps to ensure compliance with this instrument. The Committee therefore asks the Government to make the necessary efforts to bring national law and practice governing seafarers’ identity documents into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Article 5 of the Convention. Right of return. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that continuous discharge certificates are only issued to seafarers of Sri Lankan nationality and not to foreign seafarers.

Article 1. Scope. The Convention applies to “every seafarer engaged in any capacity on board a vessel”. The Committee recalls that this wording was unanimously adopted on the understanding that it refers, inter alia, to crew members actually employed on board ship at any given time (International Labour Conference, 41st Session, Record of Proceedings, ILO, Geneva, 1958, page 246). Section 324 of the Merchant Shipping Act excludes officers from the definition of “seaman” and thus from the scope of persons covered by the continuous discharge certificate (cf. section 6 of the Merchant Shipping Regulations, 1980). The Committee again requests the Government to bring the legislation governing seafarers’ identity documents into conformity with the requirements of the Convention by making it applicable to officers.

Article 2. Application for issuance of documents. The Committee notes the standard procedure for issuing continuous discharge certificates as described by the Government. It further asks the Government to indicate whether, in practice, the seafarer personally applies for the certificate or whether it is issued at the request of a manning agency or shipping company.

Article 3. Possession. According to this provision of the Convention, the seafarers’ identity document shall remain in the seafarer’s possession at all times. On page 3 of the specimen supplied by the Government, it is, however, provided that the certificate shall be given into the safekeeping of the master. The Government confirms that, until joining ship, it is the seafarer who holds the continuous discharge certificate, and that, after the engagement, the master takes it back as a policy. The Committee again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the seafarers’ identity document remains in the seafarer’s possession at all times, as required by this Article of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 2. Statement. Referring to the Committee’s previous comment on the lack of a statement in the continuous discharge certificate indicating that the document is a seafarers’ identity document for the purpose of this Convention, the Government replies “the observations of the CEACR are noted and action would be pursued”. The Committee trusts that the requisite statement will soon be incorporated in the seafarers’ identity document and requests the Government to provide it with a sample of such document.

Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 2. Permission of entry. In the absence of a response to its previous comment, the Committee again requests the Government to describe in detail by what means it is ensured that a seafarer holding a valid seafarers’ identity document issued by the competent authority of another Member, is permitted to enter Sri Lankan territory, when entry is requested for the purposes of shore leave or transit. Please also describe the evidence required from a seafarer before permitting entry into Sri Lankan territory and indicate what time limit, if any, has been fixed for the seafarer’s stay.

The Committee wishes to point out that while many States parties to the Convention use their continuous discharge certificate as the identity document, the purpose and function of a continuous discharge certificate and an identity document are fundamentally different and the regulations governing the continuous discharge certificate must at least satisfy the obligations set forth in the Convention. This is not the case at present. In view of the difficulties that Sri Lanka is experiencing with bringing its continuous discharge certificate in line with the Convention, to satisfy the requirements of a seafarers’ identity document, the Committee suggests to establish a separate seafarers’ identity document, preferably fulfilling the requirements of the new Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). This would bring the situation in line with the latest international developments and ensure continued access of Sri Lankan seafarers to international ports. The Office is available to provide technical assistance to that end, should the Government so request.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes that the continuous discharge certificate issued to seafarers by Sri Lankan authorities fails to give effect to substantial provisions of the Convention, and raises these matters once again in a request directly addressed to the Government. The Committee recalls that all obligations concerning identity documents pursuant to the Convention are applicable, irrespective of the denomination of the document or its other uses. It notes that, 11 years after ratification, the Government has not yet taken the required steps to ensure compliance with this instrument. The Committee therefore requests the Government to make the necessary efforts to bring national law and practice governing seafarers’ identity documents into conformity with the requirements of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report as well as the specimen document provided. It requests further information on the following points.

Article 1 of the Convention. The Committee notes both from the Government’s report and from article 324 of the Merchant Shipping Act that officers are excluded from the scope of persons covered by the identity document, whereas the Convention applies to every seafarer. The Committee requests the Government to bring its legislation into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to report on the steps taken.

Article 2. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the standard procedure for issuance of the identity document and whether, in practice, the seafarer requests this personally.

Article 3. The Committee notes that on page 3 of the specimen identity document it states that the document shall be given into the safekeeping of the master. However, the Convention requires that the identity document shall remain in the seafarer’s possession at all times. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any steps taken to bring its legislation into conformity with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4(2). There is no indication in the specimen identity document submitted by the Government that this is the identity document issued pursuant to ILO Convention No. 108, as required under this provision of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to bring this technical point into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to provide a new specimen document with the required statement.

Article 5. While the Committee is presently unaware whether the identity document is issued to foreign seafarers, it requests the Government to provide copies of the texts which give effect to the right of return to Sri Lanka for up to one year after the document has expired.

Article 6. The Committee requests the Government to indicate and provide copies of the texts giving effect to the provisions of this Article.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's indication that a report is being prepared. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon provide a detailed first report on the application of the Convention, and provide also a specimen of the identity document as requested in its 1997 general direct request.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes that the Government's first report refers to a previous report from the Ministry of Labour which was never received by the Office.

The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to provide a detailed first report on the application of the Convention, and to provide a specimen of the identity document, as requested in the 1997 general direct request.