Saturday, February 15, 2025
'India's Got Latent' show
Friday, December 19, 2008
Criminalisation of Seafarers
Imagine sitting in your parked car in the designated parking lot and out of nowhere comes this other vehicle and crashes into your stationary car. You are now pulled up for criminal charges of negligence, sounds fair to you or insane? I do not know about you, but I do know of two gentlemen,The Master and the Chief Officer of the tanker "Hebei Spirit", who will be languishing in a Korean prison wondering what's gone wrong with this world? How do we prove our innocence and get back home to my wife and children? We need to protest the unfair criminalisation of seafarers, who while diligently carrying out their duties at sea are upheld as criminals and victimised to save the face of major corporate – in this case Samsung Industries, Korea. This could only happen because the accident happened in Korea, their home waters, where this commercial giant could flex their muscle and dodge responsibility. This is to appeal to all citizens of this world, to support and outright condemn such corporate action where innocent people are victimised and sent behind bars. I have taken excerpts from various correspondences to summarise below the scenario around the two unfortunate seafarer victims – the Master and the Chief Officer. This is not about an isolated incident concerning seafarers – it’s about human rights, its about justice and its about a right to prove once innocence.
The Incident:
Gentlemen,
1. I have read, with some interest, at the exchanges about the Hebei Spirit collision. Please take a look at the video on the collision, available on the YouTube.
2. Initially, to avoid collision with the tow, which was passing dangerously close to the ship, crossing 0.36 miles ahead, the Master had paid out maximum cable. The cable was taut on the starboard beam, the Master having succeeded in distancing the ship from the tow. The tow passed clear of the bow, and would never had collided with the ship if the tow had continued on her course.
3. At 0652 one of the forward tug's wire parted. Most unexpectedly, within minutes, the entire tow drifted back towards the ship with the effect of the wind and sea.
4. There was absolutely no way the ship could get away from the drifting crane, which was in fact, pulling the remaining two tugs along with it. The tugs could do nothing to hold the crane. Collision occured after 14 minutes, at 0706, the first contact being made by the crane's jib with the foremast.
5. Paying out some more cable or using engines astern would have had zero effect in avoiding the collision. Letting go the bitter end is easier said than done, though it was attempted.
6. Trying to go full astern to try and part the cable would have resulted in the entire forecastle taking off along with the windlass, and if the Chief Officer was standing there, he would have become history. As a former VLCC Master, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that this is what would have happened. The Master of HS was wise in not attempting it.
7 .Many years ago, when her steering failed, the Amoco Cadiz also tried to go full astern off Ushant, but only ended up going ashore with two anchors down.
8. The Master of HS did everything possible to minimise the impact of the collision by trying to angle his ship parallel to the drift of the crane. Under the circumstances he did a splendid job. Let us give him credit for his ingenuity.
Warm regards,
Capt.K.Vivekanand
Pro Vice-Chancellor
Vels University c/o School of Maritime Studies Velan Nagar,
P.V.Vaithiyalingam Road Pallavaram, Chennai 600 117
The Outcome:
Hebei Spirit master and chief officer jailed
By Marcus Hand in Singapore - Wednesday 10 December 2008
A SOUTH KOREAN court has jailed the master and chief officer of the Hebei Spirit overturing an earlier ruling. Daejeon District Court handed down an 18 month jail sentence and a fine of Won20m on Hebei Spirit master Jasprit Chawla. The court found that the master should have gone full astern to drag the anchor. Chief officer Syam Chetan was sentenced to eight months in prison and fined Won10m, the court saying he should have been more vigilant and called the Master by 05-50hrs. The decision by the appeal court overturns an earlier ruling and finds the Master and chief officer of the Hebei Spirit partly responsible for the oil spill, which happened when the fully loaded Hebei Spirit was holed by a drifting Samsung crane barge. Both the master and chief engineer were criticised for the usage of inert gas for increasing the oil spill and that they could have listed the tanker by 10 degrees to prevenet the spill. The shipowner Hebei Shipping was fined Won30m. The decision is likely to spark widespread condemnation from the industry which has been united its call for the trial to consider all the facts of the case. “All of the parties related to the Hebei Spirit are very disappointed of course and find the reasons given for the decision - technically flawed, just like both of the KMST (Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal) reports - technically flawed and are considering our options,” said statement issued on behalf of the owners.
Independent tanker owners association Intertanko also expressed its disappointment.
“Intertanko expresses disappointment with the Korean authorities given all the efforts of owners, managers and the industry in general which seem to have fallen on deaf ears,” said Peter Swift, managing director of Intertanko. Earlier this week Intertanko wrote to South Korean president Lee Myung-bak, saying that it hoped the court would “reach a fair and just decision”.
The Protest:
Open Letter to President Lee Myung-bak, President of the Republic of Korea, from INTERTANKO
We, the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners, have noted with considerable dismay the Second (Appeal) Decision of the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST) and its findings of fault on the part of the two ship's officers of the "Hebei Spirit"; Captain Jasprit Chawla and Chief Officer, Syam Chetan. As a responsible and accountable international shipping association, which represents over 80% of independent tanker owner interests worldwide, we first wish to offer all our sympathy to the people of Korea who were so badly affected by the spill of oil which resulted when the runaway Samsung crane barge struck the legitimately anchored tanker "Hebei Spirit". We are aware that both Captain Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan were acquitted in the Daesan Court of the First Instance in June this year of all charges of criminal negligence. We are also aware that this Court Judgment is presently under appeal and understand that the Daesan Court of Appeal will be giving judgment as early as Wednesday 10 December. We are further aware that the First (Inchon) KMST Decision has already been submitted in evidence in the Daesan Court of Appeal proceedings, and that it is likely that the Second (Appeal) KMST Decision will also be submitted in evidence in these proceedings. We are advised that Courts in Korea attach great weight to KMST Decisions. Noting this, and having considered in some detail the Second (Appeal) Decision of the KMST that is now before us as well as the First (Inchon) KMST Decision, we believe them both to be technically flawed and therefore that they draw unjust conclusions. We wish also to express our concern that the KMST reports have not been produced in accordance with the internationally recognised IMO Interim Guidelines (MSC/Circ 1058) and IMO Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents. One of the cornerstones of this Code is the requirement to co-operate and consult with all interested parties before a final report is made. We therefore urge the Daesan Court of Appeal to carefully consider all of the evidence, and in particular the judgment of the Daesan Court of First Instance, and not to rely solely on these KMST Decisions when reaching its decision. We also appeal to the Court to pay full respect to all its international treaty obligations to seafarers in rendering its decision. After it has made a careful and balanced review of all the evidence, we hope that the Court will reach a fair and just decision, not just in the interests of Captain Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan, but also as a demonstration to seafarers trading to the Republic of Korea that they can expect the highest standards of fair treatment and justice. It would be highly regrettable if the outcome of these proceedings were to prove detrimental to Korea's international reputation and to its status as a tanker shipping nation, to its shipyards which rely on business from international tanker owners and to its refining and chemicals industry whose oil is delivered by the international tanker fleet. With the greatest of respect, INTERTANKO, 8th December 2008.
The Allegation:
South Korean rebuttal to Lloyd’s List opinion report Thursday 11 December 2008
From Embassy of the Republic of Korea
SIR,
In the piece ‘Hebei verdict must be just’ (Lloyd’s List, December 2), Lloyd’s List’s assertion that the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal investigation and appeals system are tainted by “collusion” and “bias” was not based on the facts of the relevant case and imprudently negates the court and administrative procedures of the sovereign state. It thus becomes a very regrettable editorial piece that only serves to irrationally defame the honour of the Republic of Korea.
1. Pertaining to the assertion that despite minimal consultation with the flag state and none whatsoever with any other stakeholders this tribunal’s report was published:
1.1 The Code of the International Standards and Recommended Practices for a Safety Investigation into a Marine Casualty or Marine Incident will be effective from January 2010. The new International Maritime Organization casualty investigation code will provide a unified investigation method as a way to resolve problems arising from different national investigation systems.
1.2 While this stands to be a new mandatory code and obligates all member states to implement it, the distinctive characteristics of the national laws of member states pertaining to marine casualty investigations have been recognized.
1.3 Article 13 of the code reads that an investigation draft report should be sent to relevant stakeholders for their views. However, as the code has not yet entered into force in the international maritime community, there exists no obligation to duly carry out any of its regulations, namely article 13.
1.4 International collaboration within the boundaries of national law is partially but most certainly possible even before the code enters into force. However, national legal procedures do not enable views of relevant stakeholders to be reflected in the final written report, and thus no practical benefit can be attained from sending a draft report to the stakeholders.
1.5 Nevertheless, in light of the special international interest and significance of this marine incident, the procedure to present relevant stakeholders with a written report is currently under review.
1.6 Moreover, article 25 of the code, which calls for a copy of the report to be sent to relevant stakeholders for their views, is only a recommendation, and presently does not correspond with national legal procedures.
2. Pertaining to the assertion that this tribunal’s report was used as evidence during criminal proceedings:
2.1 Article 23 of the code cautions that all recordings related to a casualty investigation should be kept strictly confidential, and Article 25 of the code recommends that the report should not be recognised as evidence during criminal proceedings.
2.2 The Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal, based on the open court principle undertakes an approval process to provide evidence if relevant parties to the marine incident, trial lawyers or judicial authorities should make such a request. Otherwise, the tribunal abides by the Marine Accidents Inquiry Act and its nondisclosure principle. 2.3 However, it is up to the court to decide whether to take reference of the Tribunal’s final judgment in the criminal proceedings. At present, the tribunal is without any legal grounds by which to limit the court from using the evidence. 3. Pertaining to the assertion that the Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal is preparing an overly-critical report of the Hebei Spirit seafarers:
3.1 As the editorial indicates that the report details became known even prior to it being written, it seems logical to assume and criticise that, on the contrary, the tribunal was colluding with the Hebei Spirit interests.
3.2 In addition, despite the tribunal’s official explanations, the fact that Lloyd’s List continues to print or opine assertions favourable to the Hebei Spirit interests and condemning to the Korean authorities without any sort of a filtering mechanism raises a contrary issue of whether the Lloyd’s List and the Hebei Spirit interests are colluding to pressure the tribunal and the criminal court into handing out afavourable verdict for the Hebei Spirit tanker.
3.3 The tribunal’s motto is fairness and justice, and calls for evidence to be presented in trial proceedings. Facts based on the presented evidence are accepted, and criminal procedures including hearings are open to the public and conducted transparently. As noted by Lloyd’s List, words such as collusion, bias and possible distortion of the facts are not to be applied lightly.
3.4 Nevertheless, Lloyd’s List opined that the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal and the appeals court system were tainted by such descriptions, but based purely on suspicion and speculation, and thus the editorial severely defamed the impartiality of the tribunal. Hasty expressions and words were used that could very well disturb the foundation of the judicial and administrative institutions of a sovereign state. This very regrettable piece of writing did in fact undermine the honour and prestige of the Republic of Korea.
Embassy of the Republic of Korea60 Buckingham GateLondon SW1E 6AJ.
(Source: Lloyd’s list dtd. 11-12-2008)
The Outrage:
A rally has been planned at 4.00 pm on Tuesday, 23rd December, 2008 at Azad Maidan, Opp. Mahanagar Palika, Mumbai. The family members of Capt. Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan will be present in the rally. The Indian Seafarers Federation has appealed that shipping companies may participate in the demonstration in large numbers.
DEMONSTRATION FROM 0730 TO 0830 ON SUNDAY 21ST DEC 2008, AT STATE GUEST HOUSE, WALLAJAH ROAD, CHENNAI.
DEMONSTRATION FROM 1030 TO 1045 ON SUNDAY 21ST DEC 2008, AT SAMSUNG FACTORY, SRIPERUMBUDUR, CHENNAI
Friday, 12 December 2008
THE International Maritime Employers' Committee (IMEC) added to the chorus of protest over the jailing of the Hebei Spirit members today but has also counselled the industry to focus on providing technical advice tot he South Korean authorities. IMEC Chairman, Ian Sherwood, said: "Maritime professionals, whether still at sea, or now working ashore with companies or with organisations, such as IMEC, will find this decision inexplicable. They will also feel great sympathy for the officers and their families and wish to support them in any way they can. I can only say on behalf of IMEC members that we are astonished and desperately disappointed at the Appeal Court decision." An IMEC statement added however that the absolute priority must now be to secure the release of the two officers as quickly as possible. IMEC says it remains doubtful whether public statements in the international maritime press criticising the Korean Government or the national legal system in Korea are the best way to achieve a speedy settlement of the case and considers that other measures might be more successful. Mr Sherwood said: "If, as has been suggested, the professional advice that has been provided to the Court is inadequate or deficient in many respects, then it should be the responsibility of the industry to correct this situation. Surely it would be possible for all of the international maritime organisations that have expressed their concerns over this case to send senior representatives to Korea to explain the technical details to the proper authorities to assist with the appeal process that we understand is currently in progress. I would certainly expect IMEC to be prepared to send a senior expert if this would help the situation." He added: "This is the time to get the men home. Recriminations can wait until later once the officers have been re-united with their families."
Unite in Protest to ensure a fair world.
The Incident:
Gentlemen,
1. I have read, with some interest, at the exchanges about the Hebei Spirit collision. Please take a look at the video on the collision, available on the YouTube.
2. Initially, to avoid collision with the tow, which was passing dangerously close to the ship, crossing 0.36 miles ahead, the Master had paid out maximum cable. The cable was taut on the starboard beam, the Master having succeeded in distancing the ship from the tow. The tow passed clear of the bow, and would never had collided with the ship if the tow had continued on her course.
3. At 0652 one of the forward tug's wire parted. Most unexpectedly, within minutes, the entire tow drifted back towards the ship with the effect of the wind and sea.
4. There was absolutely no way the ship could get away from the drifting crane, which was in fact, pulling the remaining two tugs along with it. The tugs could do nothing to hold the crane. Collision occured after 14 minutes, at 0706, the first contact being made by the crane's jib with the foremast.
5. Paying out some more cable or using engines astern would have had zero effect in avoiding the collision. Letting go the bitter end is easier said than done, though it was attempted.
6. Trying to go full astern to try and part the cable would have resulted in the entire forecastle taking off along with the windlass, and if the Chief Officer was standing there, he would have become history. As a former VLCC Master, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that this is what would have happened. The Master of HS was wise in not attempting it.
7 .Many years ago, when her steering failed, the Amoco Cadiz also tried to go full astern off Ushant, but only ended up going ashore with two anchors down.
8. The Master of HS did everything possible to minimise the impact of the collision by trying to angle his ship parallel to the drift of the crane. Under the circumstances he did a splendid job. Let us give him credit for his ingenuity.
Warm regards,
Capt.K.Vivekanand
Pro Vice-Chancellor
Vels University c/o School of Maritime Studies Velan Nagar,
P.V.Vaithiyalingam Road Pallavaram, Chennai 600 117
The Outcome:
Hebei Spirit master and chief officer jailed
By Marcus Hand in Singapore - Wednesday 10 December 2008
A SOUTH KOREAN court has jailed the master and chief officer of the Hebei Spirit overturing an earlier ruling. Daejeon District Court handed down an 18 month jail sentence and a fine of Won20m on Hebei Spirit master Jasprit Chawla. The court found that the master should have gone full astern to drag the anchor. Chief officer Syam Chetan was sentenced to eight months in prison and fined Won10m, the court saying he should have been more vigilant and called the Master by 05-50hrs. The decision by the appeal court overturns an earlier ruling and finds the Master and chief officer of the Hebei Spirit partly responsible for the oil spill, which happened when the fully loaded Hebei Spirit was holed by a drifting Samsung crane barge. Both the master and chief engineer were criticised for the usage of inert gas for increasing the oil spill and that they could have listed the tanker by 10 degrees to prevenet the spill. The shipowner Hebei Shipping was fined Won30m. The decision is likely to spark widespread condemnation from the industry which has been united its call for the trial to consider all the facts of the case. “All of the parties related to the Hebei Spirit are very disappointed of course and find the reasons given for the decision - technically flawed, just like both of the KMST (Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal) reports - technically flawed and are considering our options,” said statement issued on behalf of the owners.
Independent tanker owners association Intertanko also expressed its disappointment.
“Intertanko expresses disappointment with the Korean authorities given all the efforts of owners, managers and the industry in general which seem to have fallen on deaf ears,” said Peter Swift, managing director of Intertanko. Earlier this week Intertanko wrote to South Korean president Lee Myung-bak, saying that it hoped the court would “reach a fair and just decision”.
The Protest:
Open Letter to President Lee Myung-bak, President of the Republic of Korea, from INTERTANKO
We, the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners, have noted with considerable dismay the Second (Appeal) Decision of the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST) and its findings of fault on the part of the two ship's officers of the "Hebei Spirit"; Captain Jasprit Chawla and Chief Officer, Syam Chetan. As a responsible and accountable international shipping association, which represents over 80% of independent tanker owner interests worldwide, we first wish to offer all our sympathy to the people of Korea who were so badly affected by the spill of oil which resulted when the runaway Samsung crane barge struck the legitimately anchored tanker "Hebei Spirit". We are aware that both Captain Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan were acquitted in the Daesan Court of the First Instance in June this year of all charges of criminal negligence. We are also aware that this Court Judgment is presently under appeal and understand that the Daesan Court of Appeal will be giving judgment as early as Wednesday 10 December. We are further aware that the First (Inchon) KMST Decision has already been submitted in evidence in the Daesan Court of Appeal proceedings, and that it is likely that the Second (Appeal) KMST Decision will also be submitted in evidence in these proceedings. We are advised that Courts in Korea attach great weight to KMST Decisions. Noting this, and having considered in some detail the Second (Appeal) Decision of the KMST that is now before us as well as the First (Inchon) KMST Decision, we believe them both to be technically flawed and therefore that they draw unjust conclusions. We wish also to express our concern that the KMST reports have not been produced in accordance with the internationally recognised IMO Interim Guidelines (MSC/Circ 1058) and IMO Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents. One of the cornerstones of this Code is the requirement to co-operate and consult with all interested parties before a final report is made. We therefore urge the Daesan Court of Appeal to carefully consider all of the evidence, and in particular the judgment of the Daesan Court of First Instance, and not to rely solely on these KMST Decisions when reaching its decision. We also appeal to the Court to pay full respect to all its international treaty obligations to seafarers in rendering its decision. After it has made a careful and balanced review of all the evidence, we hope that the Court will reach a fair and just decision, not just in the interests of Captain Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan, but also as a demonstration to seafarers trading to the Republic of Korea that they can expect the highest standards of fair treatment and justice. It would be highly regrettable if the outcome of these proceedings were to prove detrimental to Korea's international reputation and to its status as a tanker shipping nation, to its shipyards which rely on business from international tanker owners and to its refining and chemicals industry whose oil is delivered by the international tanker fleet. With the greatest of respect, INTERTANKO, 8th December 2008.
The Allegation:
South Korean rebuttal to Lloyd’s List opinion report Thursday 11 December 2008
From Embassy of the Republic of Korea
SIR,
In the piece ‘Hebei verdict must be just’ (Lloyd’s List, December 2), Lloyd’s List’s assertion that the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal investigation and appeals system are tainted by “collusion” and “bias” was not based on the facts of the relevant case and imprudently negates the court and administrative procedures of the sovereign state. It thus becomes a very regrettable editorial piece that only serves to irrationally defame the honour of the Republic of Korea.
1. Pertaining to the assertion that despite minimal consultation with the flag state and none whatsoever with any other stakeholders this tribunal’s report was published:
1.1 The Code of the International Standards and Recommended Practices for a Safety Investigation into a Marine Casualty or Marine Incident will be effective from January 2010. The new International Maritime Organization casualty investigation code will provide a unified investigation method as a way to resolve problems arising from different national investigation systems.
1.2 While this stands to be a new mandatory code and obligates all member states to implement it, the distinctive characteristics of the national laws of member states pertaining to marine casualty investigations have been recognized.
1.3 Article 13 of the code reads that an investigation draft report should be sent to relevant stakeholders for their views. However, as the code has not yet entered into force in the international maritime community, there exists no obligation to duly carry out any of its regulations, namely article 13.
1.4 International collaboration within the boundaries of national law is partially but most certainly possible even before the code enters into force. However, national legal procedures do not enable views of relevant stakeholders to be reflected in the final written report, and thus no practical benefit can be attained from sending a draft report to the stakeholders.
1.5 Nevertheless, in light of the special international interest and significance of this marine incident, the procedure to present relevant stakeholders with a written report is currently under review.
1.6 Moreover, article 25 of the code, which calls for a copy of the report to be sent to relevant stakeholders for their views, is only a recommendation, and presently does not correspond with national legal procedures.
2. Pertaining to the assertion that this tribunal’s report was used as evidence during criminal proceedings:
2.1 Article 23 of the code cautions that all recordings related to a casualty investigation should be kept strictly confidential, and Article 25 of the code recommends that the report should not be recognised as evidence during criminal proceedings.
2.2 The Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal, based on the open court principle undertakes an approval process to provide evidence if relevant parties to the marine incident, trial lawyers or judicial authorities should make such a request. Otherwise, the tribunal abides by the Marine Accidents Inquiry Act and its nondisclosure principle. 2.3 However, it is up to the court to decide whether to take reference of the Tribunal’s final judgment in the criminal proceedings. At present, the tribunal is without any legal grounds by which to limit the court from using the evidence. 3. Pertaining to the assertion that the Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal is preparing an overly-critical report of the Hebei Spirit seafarers:
3.1 As the editorial indicates that the report details became known even prior to it being written, it seems logical to assume and criticise that, on the contrary, the tribunal was colluding with the Hebei Spirit interests.
3.2 In addition, despite the tribunal’s official explanations, the fact that Lloyd’s List continues to print or opine assertions favourable to the Hebei Spirit interests and condemning to the Korean authorities without any sort of a filtering mechanism raises a contrary issue of whether the Lloyd’s List and the Hebei Spirit interests are colluding to pressure the tribunal and the criminal court into handing out afavourable verdict for the Hebei Spirit tanker.
3.3 The tribunal’s motto is fairness and justice, and calls for evidence to be presented in trial proceedings. Facts based on the presented evidence are accepted, and criminal procedures including hearings are open to the public and conducted transparently. As noted by Lloyd’s List, words such as collusion, bias and possible distortion of the facts are not to be applied lightly.
3.4 Nevertheless, Lloyd’s List opined that the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal and the appeals court system were tainted by such descriptions, but based purely on suspicion and speculation, and thus the editorial severely defamed the impartiality of the tribunal. Hasty expressions and words were used that could very well disturb the foundation of the judicial and administrative institutions of a sovereign state. This very regrettable piece of writing did in fact undermine the honour and prestige of the Republic of Korea.
Embassy of the Republic of Korea60 Buckingham GateLondon SW1E 6AJ.
(Source: Lloyd’s list dtd. 11-12-2008)
The Outrage:
A rally has been planned at 4.00 pm on Tuesday, 23rd December, 2008 at Azad Maidan, Opp. Mahanagar Palika, Mumbai. The family members of Capt. Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan will be present in the rally. The Indian Seafarers Federation has appealed that shipping companies may participate in the demonstration in large numbers.
DEMONSTRATION FROM 0730 TO 0830 ON SUNDAY 21ST DEC 2008, AT STATE GUEST HOUSE, WALLAJAH ROAD, CHENNAI.
DEMONSTRATION FROM 1030 TO 1045 ON SUNDAY 21ST DEC 2008, AT SAMSUNG FACTORY, SRIPERUMBUDUR, CHENNAI
Friday, 12 December 2008
THE International Maritime Employers' Committee (IMEC) added to the chorus of protest over the jailing of the Hebei Spirit members today but has also counselled the industry to focus on providing technical advice tot he South Korean authorities. IMEC Chairman, Ian Sherwood, said: "Maritime professionals, whether still at sea, or now working ashore with companies or with organisations, such as IMEC, will find this decision inexplicable. They will also feel great sympathy for the officers and their families and wish to support them in any way they can. I can only say on behalf of IMEC members that we are astonished and desperately disappointed at the Appeal Court decision." An IMEC statement added however that the absolute priority must now be to secure the release of the two officers as quickly as possible. IMEC says it remains doubtful whether public statements in the international maritime press criticising the Korean Government or the national legal system in Korea are the best way to achieve a speedy settlement of the case and considers that other measures might be more successful. Mr Sherwood said: "If, as has been suggested, the professional advice that has been provided to the Court is inadequate or deficient in many respects, then it should be the responsibility of the industry to correct this situation. Surely it would be possible for all of the international maritime organisations that have expressed their concerns over this case to send senior representatives to Korea to explain the technical details to the proper authorities to assist with the appeal process that we understand is currently in progress. I would certainly expect IMEC to be prepared to send a senior expert if this would help the situation." He added: "This is the time to get the men home. Recriminations can wait until later once the officers have been re-united with their families."
Unite in Protest to ensure a fair world.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Will we be secure?
The terror attack on Mumbai got world wide attention and coined another milestone in history – ‘26/11’. Most of us, me included, sat glued to the TV, aghast, as the terrifying saga unfolded, never seeming to end, evoking anger, sympathy, horror and disbelief. The television channels were at their best – each trying to outdo the other and up their TRP.
As I watched the TV and read the newspapers, I wondered will this create the necessary change the media is screaming about and we all yearn for – a better and more secure India. Everybody seemed to agree on one thing though and its true, we Indians are a resilient lot but with a short memory. We blamed everyone from the politician to the defence and civil servants – its true they were all to blame, but are we not to blame? After every incident, there will always be heroes and villains to applaud and condemn, but at what cost and how many lives and will we always remain spectators?
It is but obvious, the terrorists would pick the weakest chink (should read ‘gaping chasm’) in our armour – our long and beautiful coastline. It’s not very long ago, after the July 2006 Mumbai bomb blasts, that a local TV channel had demonstrated how easy it was to land on the Indian coast and smuggle in a cache of bombs and munitions and transport it around. So, what have we learned? Nothing and nothing has changed. As long as we, the common man, support the existing black markets for foreign goods, these illegal inroads to our country will remain open and bring along with it the unwanted evil. The underworld thrives on it and the common man makes up the market that keeps it alive. It is also obvious that the terrorists team up or use local criminals and their gangs in their activities; therefore, unless we control and subdue local organised crime and criminals - who manage to evade or coexist with the law - India will remain a healthy ground for terrorists to exploit.
The fervour with which the TV channels reported, made me most uncomfortable, as it was a blessing of information the terrorists could have been provided and would have resulted in a much longer battle with many more lives lost. Surely the terrorists have some local support. Why couldn’t the army and police have arranged for a larger area to be cordoned off outside the range of TV cameras, thus safe guarding their men who were risking their lives in the operation? Viewers could actually count the number of commandos that were dropped from the helicopter. So much for information, that intensified the drama for the viewer but imperilled the lives of the brave soldiers. On the other hand, hardly any details or coverage of the dead and injured at CST station was reported. Unfortunately they were not the elite patrons of star hotels; their family members must have remained unaware, until very late, that they were part of the tragedy at the CST station.
I was astonished to see the proximity of the press and the public to the actual scene of operation. In fact at one instance a member of the press, near the Taj hotel was hit by stray shrapnel. More shocking were senior military personnel trying to explain their strategy and techniques on TV, was this information necessary for us or for future terrorists?
I wonder if our police are trained in crowd management, which is so necessary in a country like ours, but was unfortunately not evident on those fateful days. The police were just not there in the required numbers; maybe the army should have been called in to back up and help tackle the curious bystanders. To make matters worse we had our very concerned politicians, who came visiting the heart of the incident, to make their presence seen and heard. This created serious security issues which the politicians seemed to be either unaware or just callous.
In the Russian school hostage crisis in 2004, during the final operation the media was blacked out, not a single detail of the rescue operation was broadcast. This was necessary for the success and safety of the rescue operation. We must admit though, that finally, the Mumbai rescue operation did not last as long and the casualty count was less than the Russian school hostage crisis.
In most government organisations, it seems, the departments dealing with stores and supplies, is where most of the tax payers’ money is lost and where corruption is most deep seated. The result of this was very evident when our brave police lost their lives as they donned bullet proof vests which were supplied despite being rejected due to poor quality.
The fact that the NSG were severely handicapped due to the unfamiliar layout of the hotels only goes to show, that either the BMC does not have a requirement for public buildings to have building layout plans specifically available at convenient accesses for fire fighters in case of fire, or these prestigious hotels have blatantly ignored this requirement. Talking about fire fighters, not many fire tenders were visible when the hotel was up in flames. Were the fire hydrants functional? It seems they were either non- functional or they were dry, for they used sea water from the Arabian Sea to douse the raging fires in the heritage Taj hotel and the salt water could only add to the damage the hotel had already succumbed.
We do have a lot to be concerned about. If its the man on the street being lax about regulations, then the corporate are doing no better. This penchant for breaking laws seems to be getting out of hand and proving costly. As children it’s adventurous to acknowledge ‘rules are made to be broken’, but to continue that patronage into adult life has disastrous consequences. The fact that the terrorists had local phone sims is nothing to be shocked about. The DoT discovered that 20% of connections issued were to customers whose ID could not be established. This due to submission of fake ID’s and unverified addresses. Corporate has failed to ensure and comply by these security regulations.
Finally, each one of us needs to play our part as a responsible citizen, right down to following mundane traffic rules. We need to respect, cooperate and support the police and offices like the Lok Ayukta. They must be given more teeth, ensuring accountability at the same time and heavy penalties should be enforced for non compliance and the corrupt. Everybody marvels at Singapore’s administrative prowess, but few are aware of the draconian laws and innumerable penalties that keep the people disciplined there. A popular T-shirt sold in tourist outlets there, says it all. On the front it reads ‘Singapore is a fine city’, on the back, it lists some of the fines that burden the Singaporean. It would be an immense challenge to have a similar administration in India, but being the largest democracy has its flip side. If we have to change this nation, then we need to change it one man at a time and we need to start at home – with discipline, secularism and compliance, upholding the right and condemning the wrong, ensuring our neighbours, friends, colleagues and community does the same. Can we avoid these shocking and horrendous terrorist attacks? Maybe we can, if we took our jobs and responsibilities more seriously than the terrorists do.
As I watched the TV and read the newspapers, I wondered will this create the necessary change the media is screaming about and we all yearn for – a better and more secure India. Everybody seemed to agree on one thing though and its true, we Indians are a resilient lot but with a short memory. We blamed everyone from the politician to the defence and civil servants – its true they were all to blame, but are we not to blame? After every incident, there will always be heroes and villains to applaud and condemn, but at what cost and how many lives and will we always remain spectators?
It is but obvious, the terrorists would pick the weakest chink (should read ‘gaping chasm’) in our armour – our long and beautiful coastline. It’s not very long ago, after the July 2006 Mumbai bomb blasts, that a local TV channel had demonstrated how easy it was to land on the Indian coast and smuggle in a cache of bombs and munitions and transport it around. So, what have we learned? Nothing and nothing has changed. As long as we, the common man, support the existing black markets for foreign goods, these illegal inroads to our country will remain open and bring along with it the unwanted evil. The underworld thrives on it and the common man makes up the market that keeps it alive. It is also obvious that the terrorists team up or use local criminals and their gangs in their activities; therefore, unless we control and subdue local organised crime and criminals - who manage to evade or coexist with the law - India will remain a healthy ground for terrorists to exploit.
The fervour with which the TV channels reported, made me most uncomfortable, as it was a blessing of information the terrorists could have been provided and would have resulted in a much longer battle with many more lives lost. Surely the terrorists have some local support. Why couldn’t the army and police have arranged for a larger area to be cordoned off outside the range of TV cameras, thus safe guarding their men who were risking their lives in the operation? Viewers could actually count the number of commandos that were dropped from the helicopter. So much for information, that intensified the drama for the viewer but imperilled the lives of the brave soldiers. On the other hand, hardly any details or coverage of the dead and injured at CST station was reported. Unfortunately they were not the elite patrons of star hotels; their family members must have remained unaware, until very late, that they were part of the tragedy at the CST station.
I was astonished to see the proximity of the press and the public to the actual scene of operation. In fact at one instance a member of the press, near the Taj hotel was hit by stray shrapnel. More shocking were senior military personnel trying to explain their strategy and techniques on TV, was this information necessary for us or for future terrorists?
I wonder if our police are trained in crowd management, which is so necessary in a country like ours, but was unfortunately not evident on those fateful days. The police were just not there in the required numbers; maybe the army should have been called in to back up and help tackle the curious bystanders. To make matters worse we had our very concerned politicians, who came visiting the heart of the incident, to make their presence seen and heard. This created serious security issues which the politicians seemed to be either unaware or just callous.
In the Russian school hostage crisis in 2004, during the final operation the media was blacked out, not a single detail of the rescue operation was broadcast. This was necessary for the success and safety of the rescue operation. We must admit though, that finally, the Mumbai rescue operation did not last as long and the casualty count was less than the Russian school hostage crisis.
In most government organisations, it seems, the departments dealing with stores and supplies, is where most of the tax payers’ money is lost and where corruption is most deep seated. The result of this was very evident when our brave police lost their lives as they donned bullet proof vests which were supplied despite being rejected due to poor quality.
The fact that the NSG were severely handicapped due to the unfamiliar layout of the hotels only goes to show, that either the BMC does not have a requirement for public buildings to have building layout plans specifically available at convenient accesses for fire fighters in case of fire, or these prestigious hotels have blatantly ignored this requirement. Talking about fire fighters, not many fire tenders were visible when the hotel was up in flames. Were the fire hydrants functional? It seems they were either non- functional or they were dry, for they used sea water from the Arabian Sea to douse the raging fires in the heritage Taj hotel and the salt water could only add to the damage the hotel had already succumbed.
We do have a lot to be concerned about. If its the man on the street being lax about regulations, then the corporate are doing no better. This penchant for breaking laws seems to be getting out of hand and proving costly. As children it’s adventurous to acknowledge ‘rules are made to be broken’, but to continue that patronage into adult life has disastrous consequences. The fact that the terrorists had local phone sims is nothing to be shocked about. The DoT discovered that 20% of connections issued were to customers whose ID could not be established. This due to submission of fake ID’s and unverified addresses. Corporate has failed to ensure and comply by these security regulations.
Finally, each one of us needs to play our part as a responsible citizen, right down to following mundane traffic rules. We need to respect, cooperate and support the police and offices like the Lok Ayukta. They must be given more teeth, ensuring accountability at the same time and heavy penalties should be enforced for non compliance and the corrupt. Everybody marvels at Singapore’s administrative prowess, but few are aware of the draconian laws and innumerable penalties that keep the people disciplined there. A popular T-shirt sold in tourist outlets there, says it all. On the front it reads ‘Singapore is a fine city’, on the back, it lists some of the fines that burden the Singaporean. It would be an immense challenge to have a similar administration in India, but being the largest democracy has its flip side. If we have to change this nation, then we need to change it one man at a time and we need to start at home – with discipline, secularism and compliance, upholding the right and condemning the wrong, ensuring our neighbours, friends, colleagues and community does the same. Can we avoid these shocking and horrendous terrorist attacks? Maybe we can, if we took our jobs and responsibilities more seriously than the terrorists do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
