D. Vienna Conventions on Consular Relationships and Optional Protocol on Disputes of 1963 To enforce international law, nations have long imposed upon the accredited consuls of each nation the duty of acting with respect to any labor matters concerning their respective vessels when they are in foreign ports. These obligations have been recognized specifically by the U.S. in Sections 5(k) and (1) of the Vienna Conventions on Consular Relationships and Optional Protocol on Disputes of 1963, which was ratified by the Senate on October 22, 1969, and entered into force with respect to the United States of America on December 14, 1969. U.S. Consuls in foreign ports exercise such obligations in foreign ports for United States flag vessels as do the Consuls of foreign nations in U.S. ports over their respective flag vessels. III. THE BILL WOULD INTRUDE ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF FOREIGN NATIONS, INVITE RETALIATION AND DAMAGE UNITED STATES FLAG AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE A. Intrusion Into Foreign Domestic Law and Sovereignty The present bill seeks to impose U.S. domestic labor laws on certain foreign flag vessels, namely passenger vessels, bulk vessels and certain vessels performing lighterage services on the high seas. It does so with jurisdictional tests which would turn on the percentage of crew who are citizens of the country of registry and a 50 percent test of actual and/or beneficial ownership of the vessel by citizens of the country of registry. In other words, the law seeks to exercise United States jurisdiction by intruding into the choice of standards chosen by each flag state for qualification under its ship's registry. The number of crew who are citizens of foreign countries and the degree of ownership, directly or indirectly, beneficial or not, are sovereign choices for each country. Such tests have no Clearly every relationship to the United States and the application of the domestic labor laws. Under such a test, the reach of the United States labor laws could involve over 47.2 percent of world tonnage and most of its trading partners. sovereign country is entitled to make its own determination of its labor laws applicable to persons under its jurisdiction. this far reaching and intrusive statute were enacted, shipping and trade with the United States would immediately become involved in extended and persistent clashes of sovereignty and litigation. If The only proper approach is to respect the flag of the vessel and its registry which has always been the basic test for exercise of jurisdiction over the internal affairs of the operation of a ship, and it is the flag of the vessel that has been recognized under international law and by the Supreme Court. See, Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571 (1953). 'See Table 5, UNCTAD Review of Maritime Transport, 1991. B. Adverse Impact on United States Flag Carriers Unilateral action such as proposed by this legislation could not and would not exist in a vacuum. Other countries would be forced to retaliate by setting aside the U.S. labor laws of U.S. flag ships when they are in their ports and U.S. ships would be subject to foreign jurisdiction. International protection of seagoing personnel throughout the world under the ILO Conventions and other treaties would be undermined and there would be less, not more, protection for seamen. The resulting harm would undermine all the international efforts which have been made thus far, and United States trade would be hurt. We have heard it implied that if the United States were to enact this legislation it would be doing simply what other foreign nations are doing. We reject that view. Other nations are not seeking to intrude and impose their laws upon the internal labor matters of vessels which do not carry their flag. They have pledged not to do so under the treaties, international practice and international law, just as the United States has pledged to respect the laws of the flag state. C. Damage To International Trade International commerce and international trade between nations depends upon respect for the national laws of each of the nations involved. Trade and the merchant marines of the world, including that of the United States, cannot function efficiently in the chaotic conditions which this legislation would create. CONCLUSION The United States has recognized that the best approach to protecting merchant seamen and regulating labor matters in the international arena has been by the exercise of international law, comity and international agreements. The choice of the United States and the international community of nations has been reliance on the laws of the flag state. Unilateral action by each port state would result in a multitude of different laws, a clash of sovereign states, disruption of trade, and adverse consequences to the vessels of the port states. The major step forward was the ILO Convention 1947, which was hailed by labor of all countries. The present legislation would undermine that agreement, harm seamen's rights and hurt United States and world trade and its fleet, without any positive benefits. We urge this Committee not to pass the proposed legislation. Respectfully submitted, Council of European & Japanese May 13, 1993 By Peter G Sandlund Washington Representative I refer to the May 5 hearing on the subject bill and to the testimony. given by Thomas J. Schneider, Esq. of the firm of O'Connor & Hannon. As reflected in the transcript of the hearing, pages 44 and 52, during Mr. Schneider's claims also included a statement to the effect that "Currently there is no European Community legislation regula- |