follow before any measures is taken. The coastal state shall for instance as the general rule:
- consult with other States affected by the maritime casualty, particularly with the flag State or other States;
- notify without delay the proposed measures to any person and company known to have interests which can reasonably be expected to be affected by those measures.
- consult with an independent expert, chosen from a list maintained by IMO
With regard to the measures to be taken these shall be <<.......proportionate to the damage actual or threatened........>> (Art.?).
Evaluation
A general conclusion that may be drawn is that there are strong conditions that have to be fulfilled before a coastal state can execute an intervention to a foreign flag vessel in open waters. However, there are no limitations to the efforts the Coastal State may undertake to combat the oil spill at sea. The regulations regarding the possibility of having the costs for an oil spill operation reimbursed and the damage economically compensated, are laid down in several Conventions and their related Protocols, in particular the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969 (CLC) and the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage of 1971 (the Fund Convention). The discussion of whether these Conventions provides sufficient compensation is a consideration that falls outside the scope of this paper.
b. Territorial waters
The term <> is understood as the territorial sea and the internal waters. UNCLOS Art. 2 states that <>. Art. 8 says that <<...waters on the landward side of the baseline of the territorial sea form part of the internal waters of the State>>. This means in other words that the territorial waters are covered by the jurisdiction of the coastal state.
In Norway the relevant regulation is laid down in the Pollution Control Act. Paragraph 7 contains the general principle that << No person may possess, do or initiate anything which may entail risk of pollution unless this is permitted by law.........>>. It continues that<>. If a foreign vessel has a breakdown or is in danger of a breakdown, the point of departure is that it is the person responsible for the ship who shall take the necessary measures to prevent or reduce the pollution. In addition the same person will have a particular obligation to notify Norwegian authorities in accordance with regulations enacted pursuant to the Pollution Control Act.
In this situation the Norwegian authorities will have an advisory and supervisory role. The situation will have to be solved through co-operation with the person responsible for the ship. Paragraph 7,4 says in this connection that <>. However, if the person despite such instructions does not take the necessary measures, the authorities will have the right to intervene in accordance with paragraph 7,4. This paragraph says that <>. Such measures will have to be <>. An overall evalution of the danger of pollution and the possible consequenses will have to be made by the pollution control authority before measures are taken.
Evaluation
The major difference between the provisions of the Pollution Control Act compared to the Convention on Intervention, is the seriousness of the conditions that will have to be fulfilled before the intervention is executed. There are stronger conditions contained the Convention than the Pollution Control Act. A <> is a less stringent term than <> and <>. There will in other words be possible to intervene at an earlier stage or in relation to a smaller incident within territorial waters than
