Step 3 of 4•10 minutes read
Natural justice or the concept of being fair to all parties is an essential element in establishing a system of investigation and reporting that is acceptable to the industry. Investigation procedures should allow for a draft of the report or a relevant part of the report to be circulated to an individual or organisation that might be affected by the conclusions of the report. Any such individual or organisation should be granted a reasonable time to provide other evidence or information or make a submission relating to the report. The investigator must then take such submissions into account and amend the report or, in some way, fairly reflect the views of the person submitting.
IMO.
Reports of casualties are required to be made to IMO by SOLAS, Load Line, and MARPOL regulations. The report should be done using the “Harmonised Reporting Procedures.”
Reports are compiled from available evidence and a narrative drawn up. An analysis of the circumstances leading to the incident is carried out. Section 14 of the Code for Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents guides the content of the report. The report should include, wherever possible:
The narrative should describe the circumstances and events leading to the investigation in a neutral way, without making judgments. The facts should be stated as simply as possible.
The relevant causal factors should be reviewed and analysed. Any causal factor explained should be identifiable in the narrative section. The chart of events and conditions is a useful guide. Nor should the six questions of safety operation be ignored. It helps to keep the analysis focused and in the realms of practicality.
The conclusions must be drawn from the analysis section. They are often part of a report read initially by interested parties and other professionals. Care must be exercised to ensure they are accurate. Remember, after sending out the draft report, your conclusions will be difficult to amend in terms of being more severe.
The Code for Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents deals with the issuing of casualty reports and submissions to IMO. It makes provision for a dissenting report to be issued where a “substantially interested state” disagrees with the whole or part of the report. How widely the report is distributed is a matter for your administration. However, unless people read about accidents and are presented with accurate facts and expert analysis, lessons will not be learned, and the nature of accidents will not be understood.
Earlier in this course, advice on contact with media was offered. When releasing a report, public attention can be drawn to the publication by media release. Depending upon the trustworthiness of the individual media outlets and the importance of the incident, it may be possible to provide a report under embargo so that a journalist can read the report and provide a fully comprehensive report.
Reporting to the media may come in various formats depending on the incident.
But never forget, the creed of the majority of journalists is to get a story that will sell newspapers. Reporters may simplify a sequence of events to make the story easier to follow. And if they want to make the reality more spectacular, the truth and accuracy are often, but not always, the first casualties.
In addition to introducing a more uniform approach to marine casualty and incident investigations and promoting cooperation between substantially interested states, the stated aim of the Code is to prevent similar casualties in the future.
It can only be achieved by undertaking high-quality investigations and reporting based on the best evidence available. If undertaking high-quality investigation (including reporting) significant new evidence is provided to the state(s) involved, provision should be made to reopen the inquiry. There are several precedents for this, perhaps the most famous include the Titanic and the Derbyshire.
Are you sure to perform this action?