DETENTION REVIEW PANEL

TABLE OF CONTENT

Guidelines for the Detention Review Panel

  1. A detention order might be appealed using the national appeal procedure. When this procedure is not utilised, the owner or operator or its representative in the State concerned, might contest the decision, submitting a complaint to the flag State or the recognised organisation (if authorised to act on behalf of the flag State). The flag State or recognised organisation should review the case. If they are of the opinion that the detention should be overturned then they may then submit a reconsideration request to the port State regarding its decision to detain the ship, including all, relevant, supporting information.

  2. In such cases the port State should investigate the decision and inform the flag State or the recognised organisation of the outcome. If the port State agrees to reverse its decision it should also inform the Information System Manager and the Secretariat.

  3. If the flag State or recognised organisation disagrees with the outcome, or if the port State's outcome is not received 90 days a request for detention review may be submitted to the Secretariat within 120 days of the ship's release. The request must include all relevant information and any prior requests for reconsideration, in electronic format (email) and in English.

  4. If the port State is also a member of another PSC MoU, the Secretariat will liaise with the Secretariat of the other relevant PSC MoU.

  5. Upon receiving a request for a detention review, the Secretariat will assess its validity, considering factors such as the applicable timeframe for submitting the request, previous request to the Port State, if the request is submitted by a flag State and/or RO, and if all detainable deficiencies are challenged.

  6. If the request is accepted, the Secretariat will gather all relevant information, including:

    • Information from the port State and flag State/RO;
    • Applicable Relevant Instruments and regulations;
    • Applicable Paris MoU documentation; and
    • Similar review cases.
    • Pictures or any other relevant information derived from reports and/or plans and sketches.
  7. The Secretariat will inform the port State of the review request by electronic means, including a copy of the complaint letter, and invite the port State to submit relevant information via email. If the port State does not reply within 10 working days, the DRP will proceed with the review, based on the information submitted by the flag State and/or recognised organisation.

  8. The Secretariat will set up a “Detention Review Panel (DRP)” comprising of itself and 4 MoU Authorities, requested on an rotating basis, excluding the port and flag State. Once the panel is formed, a virtual meeting will be scheduled within 10 working days, organized by the Secretariat. During the meeting, the Secretariat will present the case and all relevant information without prejudging the outcome. Panel members will have 10 working days to submit their opinions to the Secretariat. which will then share these with all panel members for information.

  9. The Detention Review Panel will:

    • consider the procedural and technical aspects of the inspection based on the information provided by the flag State and/or the recognised organisation and the port State;
    • verify whether the raised detainable deficiency/-ies was/were a breach of the Relevant Instruments applicable to the ship according to the convention reference;
    • verify whether the relevant Paris MoU PSC procedures have been correctly applied by the PSCOs; and
    • draft an opinion indicating the relevant references which led to the position taken on the case.
  10. If a Panel member requires additional information, the Secretariat is to be contacted to ensure that all members receive the same information. Panel members are invited to execute their task following Annex 1 of this instruction.

  11. When no unanimous opinion is reached, a virtual meeting will be organized by the Secretariat to discuss the difference in opinions and attempt to achieve unanimity. If unanimity cannot be achieved, the panel's recommendation will be based on the majority opinion.

  12. The Secretariat will prepare a summary of the opinions of the DRP within 30 working days of accepting the request and will inform the flag State or the recognised organisation, as appropriate, of the outcome of the review. The port State and the MoU Advisory Board will receive the summary of opinions. Copies will be sent to the DRP members. The detail of correspondence between the DRP and the port State will be kept as an internal matter.

  13. If DRP supports the flag State or recognised organisation’s complaint, the port State will be requested to reconsider its decision.

  14. The DRP’s findings are not binding but may provide justification for the port State to amend its inspection data in the Information System and to inform the Information System Manager and the Secretariat accordingly. The Secretariat will inform the flag State or recognized organization, as appropriate, on the action (or not) taken by the port State, with copies sent to the MoU Advisory Board (MAB) and the DRP members for their records.

  15. The Secretariat will prepare an ongoing overview for every MAB meeting about results / status of the review.

  16. The Secretariat will prepare an anonymous summary of the completed cases and publish it on the internal part of the website in order to improve harmonisation of inspections.

  17. The MAB will submit an annual report on the activities of the DRP to the Port State Control Committee.

Back to Top
Annex 1 - Additional Guidelines for Panel Members
  1. Setting up a Detention Review Panel

    When, according to Instruction 58/2025/09, it becomes necessary for the Secretariat to set up a Detention Review Panel (DPR) it shall do so in accordance with paragraph seven of the Instruction. Four Member States with no involvement in the case will be elected accordingly, however, should a Member State decline wanting to take part, the Secretariat shall elect another Member State on an alphabetically rotating basis. It will be the responsibility of the Secretariat to maintain records of the rotation.

  2. Acknowledgement of Appointment

    Upon being appointed a member of the DRP the Member State should acknowledge and confirm its participation in writing. The Secretariat will then forward the associated documentation to the appointed Member State which will in turn acknowledge receipt of all the documents that have been forwarded.

  3. Acquisition of Information

    The Secretariat will forward to the Review Panel member all the information it may have acquired when the appeal was made, this should include a copy of the complaint letter from the Owner/Operator or the Recognized Organization (RO), responses from the Flag State, RO and the Port State involved, and any other relevant information derived from reports and/or plans and sketches. Where possible, photographs should also be included and forwarded to each member of the panel.

    The review panel member may seek to obtain more information through the Secretariat regarding the detention. Additional information shall be shared with all the other members.

  4. Autonomy

    All appointed members should work on each case autonomously and should not share or consult with other Member States outside of formal arranged meetings hosted by the Secretariat, irrespective of whether they are or also appointed members of the review panel or not.

    When submitting the report the Member shall direct it to the Secretariat only; copies of the report are not to be distributed to any other Member States of the PMoU or to any other third party irrespective of whether they hold a vested interest in the case or not.

  5. Delegation of Task

    In selecting the appropriate persons that should deal with the task of establishing whether a detention was justified or not, the Member State shall ensure that those to whom the task has been delegated are fully competent in carrying out that task.

  6. The Work of a Panel Member

    Panel members should conduct their work without any bias towards any of the parties involved in the detention. The Review panel member should endeavour to use all the information provided to reach a conclusive position such that the report will identify whether the member is in agreement or not; it must not contain undecided or uncertain views.

    Where it has not already been made clear each member shall make use of the Relevant Instruments accordingly and shall take all other factors such as, exemptions and other acceptable factors into account. All references shall be made clear and should in all cases be included in the report.

    Agreement with any decision taken by the Port State or by the Appealing Party shall carry with it an appropriate and justified reason, with reference to the applicable Convention requirements and relevant parts of the Paris MoU Instructions.

  7. The Report

    The report shall be submitted using only the established form supplied by the Secretariat to a participating DRP member together with the information provided.

    The report shall be made up of four parts as follows:

    • Details of the case including appeal number, ship’s name and IMO number and other relevant data as may ensure that the report is not mistaken with any other appeal case.
    • A summary of the circumstance/s which may have led to the vessel becoming detained, taking into consideration that there may be more than one detainable deficiency.
    • A reasonably detailed explanation of how the appointed member State arrived at the conclusions presented in the report. Where necessary this part of the report shall make reference to the applicable relevant Instrument or other applicable legislation.
    • A conclusion which clearly defines the position of the Review Panel member with regards to the deliberations regarding each of the detainable deficiencies (if multiple) and of the final position as to whether the detention has been justified or whether it should be withdrawn.
    • Panel members may, through the report, direct recommendations to the MAB for the attention of the Port State Control Committee, when it appears to them that action may need to be taken.
  8. Use of Reports for Training

    All PMoU Member States are encouraged to make use of past appeal cases for training purposes. New entrants should also be encouraged to study closely resolved review cases so that they may benefit from lessons learnt.

    Resolved Appeal Cases should continue to be made use of during seminars and during other training schemes designed for expert training.

Back to Top