Autonomous ship operators' liability remains unclear during oil spills

A legal study from Koç University highlights the uncertainty surrounding liability for remote operators of autonomous and remotely operated oil tankers in the event of oil spills. Under existing international rules, the shipowner remains responsible for compensating victims of oil pollution damage. However, the role of remote operators controlling these vessels from shore raises questions about their legal status and potential liability.

The 1992 International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC 92) primarily channels liability to the shipowner, who is held strictly liable for compensation. Several other parties, such as the ship's crew, pilots, and those taking preventive measures, are protected from direct negligence claims by victims. Yet, remote operators are not explicitly included in the convention's list of protected parties.

Two possible approaches are being considered: maintaining the status quo, allowing national courts to decide on the interpretation of remote operators' roles, or the International Maritime Organization (IMO) explicitly clarifying the position of remote operators. Proponents of clarification argue that it would provide legal certainty and encourage qualified specialists to enter the field of shore-based ship operation, contributing to preventing spills and coordinating emergency responses.

However, critics argue that shielding operators from direct civil claims could weaken their incentive to take precautions. The study concludes that international rules should address the legal position of remote operators to ensure consistency, responsibility allocation, and legal certainty for victims.