Hazard at Sea: The Legal Aftermath of the MSC Elsa 3 Disaster

On May 25, 2025, MSC Elsa 3, while en route to Kochi, sank approximately 38 nautical miles off Vizhinjam after reportedly suffering a total power failure and malfunction of ballast systems. At the time of the incident, the vessel carried over 640 containers. Among these, 13 containers were identified as carrying hazardous materials- 12 containers specifically contained calcium carbide. The ship was carrying significant amounts of fuel- 84.44 metric tonnes of diesel and 367.1 metric tonnes of furnace oil (totalling over 450 metric tonnes of fuel).

Although the crew was rescued, the wreck has led to significant marine pollution, raising serious legal implications.

The MSC Elsa 3 wreck occurred approximately 14.6 to 15 nautical miles off the coast near Alappuzha district of Kerala, India. Hence, the MSC Elsa 3 wreck occurred in India’s EEZ.

Applicable International Legal Frameworks

Jurisdictional and Regulatory Framework

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), often described as the “Constitution of the Oceans,” provides the foundational legal framework governing the MSC Elsa incident, particularly with respect to jurisdiction, environmental protection, and rights over maritime zones.

1. Flag State Jurisdiction

As per Article 92 of UNCLOS, every ship on the high seas is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of its flag state, save in exceptional cases expressly provided for in international treaties or in this Convention. The MSC Elsa, registered under the flag of Liberia, therefore falls primarily under Liberia’s jurisdiction. This entails the obligation for Liberia to ensure the vessel’s compliance with applicable international conventions concerning safety, pollution prevention, and crew welfare.

Hence, Liberia bears responsibility for:

• Conducting a thorough investigation into the causes of the wreck (Article 94 UNCLOS),
• Enforcing standards for navigation and safety,
• Overseeing compensation claims arising from the incident,
• Cooperating with other states to mitigate the impact of the wreck.

2. Coastal State Jurisdiction

The location of the MSC Elsa wreck near the India’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) invokes important jurisdictional considerations under Articles 55 to 75 of UNCLOS. Although India does not exercise full sovereignty in the EEZ, it holds sovereign rights to explore and protect natural resources and the marine environment.

Under Article 56, India is empowered to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control marine pollution emanating from vessels operating within or near its EEZ. Furthermore, Article 221 provides the coastal state the right to take “necessary measures” to prevent or mitigate pollution damage following a marine casualty, even on the high seas adjacent to its EEZ.

Liability and Compensation Regimes

The MSC Elsa wreck poses potential damage to coastal states’ environment, fisheries, and economic interests, triggering liability and compensation issues governed by several international conventions.

1. The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC) (1992 Protocol)

MSC Elsa spilled oil or other hazardous substances hence, the CLC regime becomes relevant. The convention imposes strict liability on the ship owner for pollution damage caused by oil spills, regardless of fault. It also requires compulsory insurance or other financial security to compensate victims.

Under the CLC:

• Victims suffering pollution damage may claim compensation directly from the shipowner or its insurer.
• The shipowner’s liability is limited, but this cap is sufficiently high to provide meaningful compensation.
• The convention emphasizes prompt payment, which is critical for the timely remediation of pollution damage.

2. The Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks (2007)

The Nairobi Convention is directly applicable to shipwrecks posing hazards to navigation or the environment. It establishes a clear framework for:

• Flag State Obligations: The flag state must promptly notify coastal states of the wreck and take action to mark and remove hazardous wrecks.
• Coastal State Powers: If the flag state fails to act, the coastal state may intervene, carrying out removal operations at the shipowner’s expense.
• Liability and Insurance: The shipowner is strictly liable for removal costs and must maintain compulsory insurance or financial security.

The MSC Elsa, with hazardous cargo and potential navigational hazard, falls within the ambit of this convention, obliging all parties to coordinate wreck removal efforts expeditiously.

3. The International Convention on Salvage (1989)

Once the wreck is located, salvage operations become critical for environmental protection and property recovery. The Salvage Convention governs these operations by:

• Providing salvors with the right to claim remuneration based on the value of property saved,
• Introducing the concept of special compensation for salvors who prevent or minimize environmental damage, even if no property is saved,
• Encouraging environmentally sensitive salvage practices, especially relevant for wrecks like the MSC Elsa carrying hazardous cargo.

Environmental Protection

Liberia has ratified key international environmental conventions, which impose obligations related to the MSC Elsa incident.

1. MARPOL Convention

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) mandates:

• Ship design and operational standards to prevent pollution,
• Strict controls on the discharge of oil, noxious substances, garbage, and sewage,
• Implementation of shipboard oil pollution emergency plans.

While MARPOL primarily regulates operational discharges, its provisions influence incident response strategies and investigation into whether the MSC Elsa complied with pollution prevention standards prior to wrecking.

• Oil Spill Liability: Under MARPOL Annex I, MSC is liable for pollution damage. The Indian Coast Guard’s deployment of dispersants adheres to MARPOL’s contingency planning requirements.
• Hazardous Cargo: Calcium carbide (reacting with water to release toxic gas) in 13 containers implicates MARPOL Annex III (harmful substances). Proper packaging and declaration under the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG) Code are essential; any lapses could amplify MSC’s liability.

2. The International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC) (1990)

OPRC compels parties to maintain preparedness for oil pollution incidents through:

• National contingency plans,
• Cooperative response mechanisms,
• Obligations for prompt notification and assistance requests.

Given the MSC Elsa’s wreck involves hazardous cargo, affected states must coordinate pollution response in accordance with OPRC’s provisions.

Maritime Safety and Search & Rescue Responsibilities

The MSC Elsa incident also triggers obligations relating to crew safety, accident investigation, and search and rescue.

1. SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) Convention

SOLAS, the key international treaty on ship safety, sets standards for ship construction, equipment, and operation designed to minimize accidents. Post-incident investigations into the MSC Elsa’s seaworthiness, crew training, and compliance with safety regulations will hinge upon SOLAS requirements.

• SOLAS sets minimum safety standards for ships, including construction, equipment, and operation.
• SOLAS requires vessels to be seaworthy and mandates compliance with the IMDG Code for hazardous cargo.
• Indian authorities are empowered to investigate whether the MSC Elsa 3 met SOLAS standards for seaworthiness, stability, and hazardous cargo management.
• SOLAS also ensures the safety and rights of crew members, which in this case were upheld as all 24 crew were safely evacuated.

2. The International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) (1979)

SAR obligations require immediate coordination among flag, coastal, and regional states to organize search and rescue operations to save lives. The incident involving MSC Elsa likely activated SAR protocols to rescue crew and mitigate loss of life.

Indian Legal Provisions Based On International Maritime Conventions

India, as a party to major international maritime treaties, has enacted specific legislation aligning domestic law with its obligations under UNCLOS, MARPOL, the Civil Liability Convention (CLC), OPRC Convention, and the SOLAS.

1.  Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976

• Section 7: Establishes India’s sovereign rights in the EEZ for resource conservation and environmental protection.
• Section 15: Empowers the Central Government to make rules for protection of the marine environment and take action in case of pollution.

2. The Merchant Shipping Act, 1958

a. Provisions Implementing the MARPOL:

India implements the MARPOL Convention in 2003 by way of an Amendment to Merchant Shipping Act of 1958, specifically under Sections 356A to 356I. These sections empower the government to make rules for preventing and controlling pollution from ships, directly reflecting MARPOL’s requirements on oil, chemicals, sewage, garbage, and air pollution.

Rules Incorporating MARPOL Annexes I, II, and III in India respectively are:

• Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Oil) Rules, 1983, framed under the Merchant Shipping Act. These rules set standards for oil discharge, equipment, and pollution prevention measures for ships.
• Merchant Shipping (Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk) Rules, 1987- These rules regulate the carriage and discharge of noxious liquid substances in bulk.
• Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form) Rules, 1996- These rules require compliance with the IMDG Code for safe packaging, labeling, and documentation of dangerous goods.

b. Provisions implementing the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC), 1990

Under the Merchant Shipping Act, India implements the OPRC 1990 through the Merchant Shipping (OPRC) Rules, 2002.

The Merchant Shipping (OPRC) Rules, 2002 has incorporated the following:

• Oil Pollution Emergency Plans (OPEPs) for ships and offshore units
• Mandatory reporting of pollution incidents
• Indian Coast Guard as the national authority for response
• Implementation of the National Oil Spill Disaster Contingency Plan (NOS-DCP)
• Enforcement of the “polluter pays” principle.

c. Provisions Implementing the Civil Liability Convention (CLC), 1992

The Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Act, 2002 amended the MSA, 1958, to implement the CLC, 1992. The Act establish liability limits for oil pollution damage, mandate compulsory insurance for ships carrying oil, and outline procedures for direct claims against insurers.

The key provisions under The Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Act, 2002 incorporating Civil Liability Convention (CLC), 1992 are:

• Strict Liability of Shipowner:
  The shipowner is strictly liable for pollution damage caused by oil spills from ships, regardless of fault.
• Limitation of Liability:
  The Act sets a cap on the shipowner’s liability for each incident, as notified by the government in line with the CLC limits (Section 352J).
• Compulsory Insurance:
  Ships carrying more than 2,000 tons of oil must maintain insurance or other financial security to cover potential liability (Section 352N).
• Direct Right of Action:
  Victims of oil pollution damage have the right to claim compensation directly from the insurer (Section 352A).
• Jurisdiction and Enforcement:
  Indian courts are empowered to hear claims for pollution damage occurring in India’s territory or EEZ (Section 352X).

d. Provisions Implementing the SOLAS

The 2008 Amendment Act to Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and its Rules, implement key provisions of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), ensuring that ships under the Indian flag meet international safety standards. The Act and its associated rules address the following essential SOLAS provisions:

• Ship Construction and Equipment:
  The Act mandates standards for ship design, construction, stability, and subdivision, reflecting SOLAS Chapters II-1 and II-2. This includes requirements for watertight integrity, fire protection, and machinery safety.
• Life-Saving Appliances and Fire Safety:
  Provisions require ships to carry life-saving appliances (lifeboats, life jackets, rafts) and fire-fighting equipment, in line with SOLAS Chapter III and Chapter II-2. The relevant rules specify periodic inspections and maintenance.
• Navigation and Communication:
  The Act empowers the government to set rules for navigational safety, including the use of radar, Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), and up-to-date nautical charts, as required by SOLAS Chapter V. It also mandates radio equipment and distress communication protocols.
• Carriage of Dangerous Goods:
  The Act incorporates the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, as required by SOLAS Chapter VII, ensuring proper packaging, labeling, and documentation of hazardous cargo.
• Crew Safety and Training:
  Provisions ensure that crew members receive adequate safety training and that ships maintain muster lists and conduct regular emergency drills, as per SOLAS standards.
• Accident Investigation and Reporting:
  The Act authorizes inquiries into maritime casualties, ensuring compliance with SOLAS requirements for prompt investigation and reporting of accidents affecting ship safety.

Possibility Of India Initiating Proceedings Before ITLOS

As both India and Liberia are parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), India may consider initiating proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), headquartered in Hamburg, Germany, under Part XV of the Convention.

Potential grounds for India to invoke ITLOS jurisdiction include:

• Liberia’s failure to fulfil its obligations under UNCLOS Articles 94, 192, 194, or 198 regarding environmental protection, pollution notification, or vessel oversight.
• Non-cooperation in wreck removal or clean-up efforts.
• Transboundary harm or serious threat to India’s marine ecosystem and sovereign rights in the EEZ.

For ITLOS to hear the case:

• The dispute must be between India and Liberia (not with the shipowner).
• India must show that it attempted diplomatic negotiation (Article 283).
• There must be a failure of Liberia to take reasonable remedial or cooperative action.

Thus, if Liberia is non-compliant, and India’s EEZ or marine environment faces continuing risk from the MSC Elsa 3 wreck, initiating proceedings before ITLOS could be a strategic legal recourse.

Conclusion

The MSC Elsa shipwreck serves as a reminder of the real-world consequences that follow when a maritime incident unfolds across international boundaries. For Liberia as the flag state, and for all parties involved—from shipowners to insurers and coastal authorities—it illustrates how critical it is to be prepared, both legally and operationally. This incident reinforces the need for clear accountability under global conventions like UNCLOS, MARPOL, the Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention, and the Civil Liability Convention. Ultimately, it highlights how swift, coordinated, and compliant responses can help limit environmental harm, reduce liability, and protect reputations in an increasingly scrutinized maritime

Contributed by – Anakhka Ajay