A survey of the legal and policy framework for controlling, compensating and criminalizing ship-source pollution in Hong Kong

- A review of HK's environmental legislation on ship-source pollution control, civil liabilities and criminal penalties.
- Data collected will be fed into policy making on how shipping can strive to become more environmentally sustainable.
- Reinforcing Port State Control (PSC) measures represents a possible path to improving vessel performance.
- Increasing civil liability limits adds greater deterrence against environmental violations.
- Stringent penalties increase the legitimacy of the pollution criminalization regime.

Hong Kong (HK) has enacted laws providing: (1) Regimes that address pollution prevention responsibilities for parties involved in shipping activities to ensure that ships used in HK waters comply with applicable rules and standards; (2) civil damages remedy for wrongful death, personal injury or property damage caused by an environmental incident; and (3) a system of penalties to address the rare cases where the behavior of the polluter is considered intolerable and must be punished as a criminal offence. Being acquainted with this legal and policy framework is of beneficial interest for the maritime industry in HK. This article first summarizes the existing general legal framework, and later presents the results of an empirical study to determine what repercussions there could be within the HK maritime industry as a result of these laws and policies being applied in cases that result in civil liability compensation and criminal charges. The empirical research demonstrates that the laws and policies are in general sufficient and effective, but that flaws still remain in the limitation of liability scheme, as well as uncertainties as to which particular kinds of environmental violations should result in either civil or criminal enforcement. To address these concerns, it is first suggested that HK should impose greater liability in areas where prior law provided insufficient liability, as this will act as a more potent deterrent; and second, that HK should clearly delineate an appropriate role for criminal enforcement in the environmental regulatory scheme, so as to lessen concerns about over-criminalization.