Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) - Japan (Ratification: 2013)

The Committee notes the Government’s second report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014 and 2016 entered into force for Japan on 18 November 2017 and 8 January 2019 respectively. Based on its second review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) and of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 October 2020 and 26 October 2020 respectively, alleging that ratifying states have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Convention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Noting with deep concern the impact of the COVID pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention, the Committee refers to its general observation of 2020 on this issue.

Article II, paragraphs 1(i) and 4 of the Convention. Definitions and scope of application. Ships. The Committee notes that some of the provisions of the Seafarers Act apply differently some of the requirements implementing the MLC, 2006 for “ships that navigate only in coasting areas or smooth water areas and only between domestic ports” (e.g. Article 75, paragraph 2, of the Seafarers Act regarding annual leave). The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to all ships, irrespective of their tonnage or the nature of their voyage, other than those ships which navigate exclusively in inland waters or waters within, or closely adjacent to, sheltered waters or areas where port regulations apply whether publicly or privately owned, ordinary engaged in commercial activities, other than ships engaged in fishing, traditional build, warships or naval auxiliaries (Article II, paragraphs 1(i) and 4). The Committee requests the Government: (i) to explain the meaning of the following expression: “ships that navigate only in coasting areas or smooth water areas and only between domestic ports”; and (ii) to provide statistical information about the number and categories of ships falling under this category. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that the protection afforded by the Convention is guaranteed to all seafarers working on board ships within the meaning of the Convention, including ships engaged in domestic voyages.

Article II, paragraphs 1(i), 4, 5 and 7. Definitions and scope of application. Ships. National determination. The Committee noted in its previous comment that by Note Verbale dated 5 August 2013, the Government informed the ILO that, concerning Article II, paragraph 5, of the Convention, the Convention would not apply to “ships of less than 20 gross tonnage and ships for which owners only employ relatives residing with such owners”. Recalling that the Convention does not allow any exclusions on the basis of tonnage or the fact that only relatives of the owner work in a ship, the Committee therefore requested the Government to specify if the ships whose categories are mentioned in the Note Verbale of 5 August 2013 exclusively navigate in waters within, or closely adjacent to, sheltered waters or areas where port regulations apply and, if that is not the case, to review the national determination made in relation to these ships, in consultation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, in order to fully comply with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it will take the Committee’s comment into account and reconsider the definition of ship covered by the Convention which is mentioned in Note Verbale dated 5 August 2013. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Article II, paragraphs 6 and 7. Definitions and scope of application. Ships under 200 gross tonnage. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that by Note Verbale dated 5 August 2013, the Government informed the ILO that “[w]ith reference to Article II, paragraph 6, of the Convention, Japan will not apply the provisions of Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1 of the Convention to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages”. The Committee recalled that the flexibility provided in Article II, paragraph 6, of the Convention only applies to the Code of the Convention (Standards and Guidelines) and therefore drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the decision to exclude ships of less than 200 gross tonnage from the application of Regulation 3.1 is not in conformity with Article II of the Convention. The Committee also considered that a Member is not entitled to determine that a Standard of the Convention, almost in its entirety, is not applicable to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage. The Committee therefore requested the Government to (i) re-examine, in consultation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, the national determination it has made concerning the provisions of Standard A3.1 to exclude the reference to Regulation 3.1; and (ii) to specify which provisions of this Standard are not reasonable or practicable to apply at the present time and to explain how the subject matter is dealt with differently by national laws or regulations or collective bargaining agreements or other measures. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the reference to Regulation 3.1 will be excluded from the national determination it has made in order to comply with the Convention. With respect to the provisions of Standard A3.1, the Committee further notes the Government’s indication that it determined, after consulting with shipowner and seafarer organizations, in the Seafarer Sectional Meeting, Maritime Group Discussion, the Council of Transport Policy, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, on July 30, 2010, that it would not be reasonable or practicable at the present time to apply MLC, 2006 requirements with respect to accommodation and recreation facilities to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages due to the structure of the ships and the mode of navigation, etc., and therefore the standards of domestic laws and regulations will be differently imposed. The Committee takes note of some of the specific requirements provided under Standard A3.1, paragraphs 6 to 9, that Japan applies differently for ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages (e.g. Article 111, paragraph 2 of Rule of Ship Appliance provides that the height of crew rooms, etc. of the ships must be 1.8 meters or more, instead of a minimum of 203 centimetres required by Standard A3.1, paragraph 6 (a); Article 115-9 of Rule of Ship Appliance provides that the dimensions of a berth unit for the ships shall be at least 180 centimetres by 60 centimetres instead of dimensions of at least 198 centimetres by 80 centimetres as required by Standard A3.1, paragraph 9 (e)). While noting some of the alternative requirements to those provided for under Standard A3.1, paragraphs 6 to 9, the Committee notes that it is not clear whether the other requirements of Standard A3.1 are applied, given that by Note Verbale dated 5 August 2013, the Government indicated that it will not apply [in its entirety] the provisions of Standard A3.1 of the Convention to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages. Recalling that ships under 200 GT not engaged in international voyages may not be fully excluded from all the requirements of the Convention beyond “certain details of the Code”, the Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate: (i) the specific provisions of Standard A3.1 that nonetheless apply to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages; and (ii) to provide in detail the list of alternative national provisions through which “the subject matter is dealt with differently” for each paragraph of Standard A3.1, that these ships are not required to comply with.

Article III. Fundamental Rights and Principles. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that Japan has not ratified the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), nor the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) and requested the Government to provide information on how it has satisfied itself that its laws and regulations, in the context of the MLC, 2006, respect these fundamental rights referred to in Article III. The Committee takes note the Government’s indication that Article 6 of the Seafarers Act stipulates that the provisions of the Labour Standards Act, set out under Articles 3, 4, 5, 117 and 119, which lay down the principles of prohibition of forced labour and of equal treatment and equal wages for men and women apply to seafarers and therefore respect the fundamental rights and principles referred to in Article III, paragraphs (b) and (d) of the Convention. The Committee however notes that, with regard to the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, Articles 3 and 4 of the Labour Standards Act only provide for certain grounds of discrimination (gender, nationality, creed or social status). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide more information, in particular as regards seafarers’ rights, regarding the elimination of any discrimination in respect of employment and occupation made on the basis of race, colour and political opinion.

Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4. Substantial Equivalence. Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b). Medical doctor on board. The Committee notes that Article 82(1) of the Seafarers Act provides that a vessel “of not less than 3,000 gross tonnage” with a maximum capacity of not less than 100 persons which navigates within the oceangoing area or the coasting area shall carry a doctor or doctors. The Committee recalls that Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b) applies to all ships covered by the Convention, regardless of tonnage. The Committee observes that the DMLC, Part I refers to substantial equivalence in relation to Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b). The Committee observes however that the Government has not provided information on the national legal provisions that it regards as an alternative solution to the requirement of the Code of the MLC, 2006. In this regard, the Committee recalls that Article VI, paragraph 3, of the Convention provides that “a Member which is not in position to implement the rights and principles in the manner set out in Part A of the Code may, unless expressly provided otherwise in this Convention, implement Part A through provisions in its laws and regulations or other measures which are substantially equivalent to the provisions of Part A”. The Committee recalls that explanations are required where a national implementing measure differs from the requirements of Part A of the Code. In particular, the Committee needs information on the reason why the Member was not in a position to implement the requirements in Part A of the Code, as well as (unless obvious) on the reason why the Member was satisfied that the substantial equivalence met the criteria set out in paragraph 4 of Article VI. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed information, as explained above, with respect to the adoption of substantial equivalence measures concerning Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b).

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 1. Minimum age. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that Article 85(1) of the Seafarers Act allows for an exception to the prohibition of the employment, engagement or work on board a ship of any person under the age of 16 for “ships that employ only members belonging to the same household”. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in order to amend Article 85(1) of the Seafarers Act so as to ensure that no exceptions are permitted to the minimum age for work. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that, on the basis of comments from the Committee, it will reconsider its domestic laws. Recalling that no person below the minimum age shall be employed or engaged or work on ship, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this regard and provide copy of the amended legislation once adopted.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraphs 2 and 3. Minimum age. Night work. The Committee noted in its previous comment that Article 86(1), of the Seafarers Act prohibits seafarers under the age of 18 to engage in work during the period from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. the next day but that paragraph 3 of the same Article stipulates that the provisions of paragraph 1 shall not apply “with regard to fishing boats and ships that employ only members of the same household as the shipowner”. The Committee recalled that the only exceptions to the strict compliance with the night work restriction authorized are those provided for under Standard A1.1, paragraph 3. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in order to amend Article 86(3) of the Seafarers Act so as to ensure that exceptions to night work are only allowed in conformity with the Convention. Noting the Government’s indication that it will reconsider its domestic laws, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this regard and provide copy of the amended legislation once adopted.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Minimum age. Hazardous work. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, pursuant to Article 85(2) of the Seafarers Act, employment of seafarers under 18 is prohibited where the work is likely to jeopardize their health and safety and that the list of such types of work is included in Article 28 of the Regulations for Labour Safety and Health of Seafarers. The Committee requested the Government to specify if the list of hazardous work has been determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, as required under Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that this list was determined after consulting with shipowner and seafarer organizations in the 224th Seafarer Central Labour Committee (on March 19, 1964) when the Ordinance on Industrial Safety and Health for Seafarers was established in 1964. The Committee takes note of this information. It requests the Government to provide information on any revision and update of the list in consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned.

Regulation 1.2 and Standard A1.2, paragraph 5. Medical Certificate. Right to have a further examination. The Committee notes that Article 83, paragraph 1 of the Seafarers Act and Article 55 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Seafarers Act regulate the requirements with respect to the medical fitness examinations of seafarers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that undertaking further examinations for a medical certificate is not prohibited under the Seafarers Act and that it is therefore possible for a seafarer to have a further examination from another medical doctor. The Committee however observes that the Government does not specify what is the legal basis, in its national provisions, for allowing seafarers who have been refused a certificate or have had a limitation imposed on their ability to work to have a further examination by another independent medical practitioner or by an independent medical referee as provided for under Standard A1.2, paragraph 5, of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to specify the legislative or regulatory provisions that give effect to this requirement of the Convention.

Regulation 1.4 and the Code. Recruitment and placement. The Committee notes that the Seafarers Employment Security Act contains relevant provisions relating to Regulation 1.4 and Standard A1.4. The Committee notes the list of licensed recruitment and placement services regulated under the requirements of Standard A1.4 of the Convention. While noting the Government’s indication that unemployment insurance for seafarers is contained in the Seafarers Employment Insurance Act, the Committee observes that the Government has not specified the relevant provisions of this Act that protect seafarers against monetary loss that they may incur as result of the failure of recruitment and placement services. In light of the general nature of the information provided by the Government on the application of Regulation 1.4, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information, in particular, on how the requirements of Standard A1.4, paragraph 5, are complied with (prohibition of blacklists, keeping registers, qualification of seafarers, protection of seafarers in foreign ports, managing complaints and establishment of a compulsory insurance scheme to compensate seafarers).

Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraph 4. Content of the seafarers’ employment agreement. The Committee notes that Articles 32 and 36 of the Seafarers Act and Article 16 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Seafarers Act reflect the majority of the matters to be included in seafarers’ employment agreements (hereafter SEA) listed under Standard A2.1, paragraph 4. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that paragraphs (i) and (viii) of Article 16 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Seafarers Act give effect to the requirements of Standard A2.1, paragraph 4 (g) with respect to the conditions of termination of the agreement. The Committee observes however that paragraphs (i) and (viii) of Article 16 of the Ordinance refer respectively to “the period of employment” and to “matters concerning retirement, dismissal, suspension of work and sanction” and do not include the particulars specified in Standard A2.1, paragraph 4(g). The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that the particulars to be contained in the SEA include the termination of the agreement and the conditions thereof, including: (i) if the agreement has been made for an indefinite period, the conditions entitling either party to terminate it, as well as the required notice period, which shall not be less for the shipowner than for the seafarer; (ii) if the agreement has been made for a definite period, the date fixed for its expiry; and (iii) if the agreement has been made for a voyage, the port of destination and the time which has to expire after arrival before the seafarer should be discharged, in conformity with Standard A2.1, paragraph 4(g).

Regulation 2.4 and the Code. Entitlement to leave. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the Government’s reference to Articles 74 and 75 of the Seafarers Act, which stipulate the conditions to be entitled to annual leave and its duration. Noting that, under these provisions, in order to be entitled to annual leave, a seafarer must have “engaged in work continuously on a ship belonging to the same enterprise for six months”, the Committee requested the Government to indicate how it has given due consideration to Guideline B2.4.1, paragraph 3, in implementing its obligations concerning annual leave in order to ensure that seafarers who work less than six months for an enterprise are given paid annual leave on a pro-rata basis. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Chapter VII of the Seafarers Act gives effect to Standard A2.4, paragraph 1, of the Convention by providing the minimum standards of annual leave for seafarers. The Committee however observes once again that under the provisions of Articles 74 and 75 of the Seafarers Act, only seafarers who have been engaged in work for six months and over are entitled to annual leave. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that all seafarers, including those who work less than six months for an enterprise, are effectively entitled to annual paid leave, in accordance with Regulation 2.4, paragraph 1.

Regulation 2.4 and Standard A2.4, paragraph 2. Entitlement to leave. Minimum paid annual leave. Method of calculation. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, depending on the length of contract or type of ship on which the seafarer works, the latter may be entitled to less than 2.5 days of leave per month, which is the minimum required under Standard A2.4, paragraph 2 and requested the Government to explain the measures taken to conform to the minimum requirements of the Convention regarding annual leave. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates the indication that, pursuant to Article 80 of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) signed between the All Japan Seamen’s Union and the Japanese Shipowners’ Association Ocean-going Labour Subcommittee, 120 days per year of onshore vacation (paid leave) are granted. While noting this information, the Committee notes that (i) this CBA does not cover all seafarers, in accordance with article 5 of the CBA; and (ii) even though the CBA currently in force provides for more than the minimum annual leave required by Standard A2.4, paragraph 2, Standard A2.4, paragraph 1, requires the adoption of laws and regulations determining paid annual leave for seafarers on the basis of a minimum of 2.5 calendar days per month of employment. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures envisaged or taken to give full effect to Standard A2.4, paragraphs 1 and 2.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(b). Repatriation. Maximum period of service on board. In its previous comment, noting that the legislation contained no reference to the maximum period of service on board a ship following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the provisions giving effect to Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(b). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Article 47, paragraph 1, of the Seafarers Act provides the entitlement to repatriation of all seafarers irrespective of their period of employment and that consequently, the maximum duration of service periods on board following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation required by Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(b) of the MLC, 2006 is not specified in the Seafarers Act. The Committee observes however that the absence of reference in Article 47 of the Seafarers Act to the maximum period of service on board a ship following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation, as well as the mention in Article 75, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the same Act to additional days of paid leave for additional months of work after the period of one year of continuous work, may suggest that a seafarer could be working on board a ship for a period of 12 months or more. The Committee recalls that from the combined reading of Standard A2.4, paragraph 3, on annual leave, and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(b), on repatriation, it flows that the maximum continuous period of shipboard service without leave is, in principle, 11 months. The Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure full compliance with these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(c). Repatriation. Entitlements. In its previous comment, noting that Article 47(1) of the Seafarers Act provides that the shipowner shall repatriate the seafarer to the port where the seafarer was employed or, at the request of the seafarer, to another location if this is not more expensive, the Committee requested the Government to explain how it has given due consideration to the provisions of Guideline B2.5.1, paragraphs 6 and 7, according to which seafarers should have the right to choose from among the prescribed destinations the place to which they are repatriated. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Article 47, paragraph 1, of the Seafarers Act provides that the destination of repatriation can be decided by seafarers within the limit of the expense and that the various destinations listed in Guideline B2.5.1, paragraph 6 are generally covered. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 3. Repatriation. Prohibition of advance payment and to recover costs from seafarers. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to explain how it ensures that seafarers only pay the costs of repatriation where they have been found in accordance with national laws or regulations or other measures or applicable collective bargaining agreements, to be in serious default of their obligations, and to indicate in particular the procedure to be followed and the standard of proof to be applied before a seafarer can be found to be in “serious default of the seafarers employment obligations”. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Article 47, paragraph 2, of the Seafarers Act ensures that seafarers pay expenses for repatriation only when a serious default of employment duty of seafarers has been recognized under the circumstances listed in Article 40 Item (ii) through (v) of the Seafarers Act. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the standards and process of the recognition of wilful intent or gross negligence are as follows: shipowners receive the reports from the master and they make final decisions by considering provisions of rewards and punishment under collective bargaining agreements and diagnosis of injury or illness by a doctor. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the definition of what is to be considered as a serious misconduct should not be left to the shipowner’s decision. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on provisions in national laws or regulations or other measures or applicable collective agreements setting out the procedure to be followed and the standard of proof to be applied in order for a seafarer to be found liable for serious default.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Repatriation. Financial security. Abandonment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Japanese Protection & Indemnity Insurance covers the financial security system to ensure the entitlement to repatriation and that it has submitted an example of a certificate of insurance in respect of seafarer repatriation costs and liabilities as required under Regulation 2.5.2, Standard A2.5.2. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) does national legislation require the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in the event of their abandonment (if yes, specify if the financial security system was determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned); (b) has your country received requests to facilitate repatriation of a seafarer and, if yes, how did your country respond; (c) what are the circumstances under which a seafarer is considered abandoned according to national legislation; (d) does national legislation provide that ships that need to be certified according to Regulation 5.1.3 must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence must contain the information required by Appendix A2-I and has to be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (e) does national legislation require that the financial security system is sufficient to cover outstanding wages and other entitlements, all expenses incurred by the seafarer (including the cost of repatriation), and the essential needs of the seafarers, as defined in Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 9; and (f) does national legislation provide for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the abovementioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions.

Regulation 2.7 and the Code. Manning Levels. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to explain how it is ensured that, when determining manning levels, the competent authority takes into account all the requirements of the Convention concerning food and catering. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that Article 80, paragraph 4 of the Seafarers Act provides that persons who are capable of processing food adequately shall be on board. While noting the Government’s indication, the examples of minimum safety manning certificates supplied by the Government (regarding manning of ten and more seafarers) do not contemplate a ship’s cook in the manning of the ships concerned. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to review its practice regarding minimum safety manning certificates in order to take into consideration Regulation 3.2 and the Code. It also requests the Government to indicate whether any mechanisms exist to investigate and resolve any complaints or disputes regarding the minimum safety manning levels (Guideline B2.7.1).

Regulation 2.8 and the Code. Career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers. The Committee notes that the Government’s report provides information concerning the Seafarers Employment Security Act. The Committee observes however that this Act prescribes requirements with respect to seafarer recruitment and placement services rather than measures concerning career and skill development and opportunities for seafarers’ employment. The Committee draws the Government’s attention, in this respect, to Regulation 2.8 and the Code, which require the adoption, by all Members who have seafarers domiciled in their territories, of policies to encourage career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information with respect to any policies adopted in this regard.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1, paragraphs 20 and 21. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Exemptions. The Committee noted in its previous comment that Article 115-4-2 of the Rule of Ship Appliance provides that lightning equipment must be installed in crew rooms but does not specify that sleeping rooms and mess rooms shall be lit by natural light and provided with adequate artificial light. The Committee further observed that the Rule of Ship Appliance provides the maritime authority with a broad power to make exceptions from the national requirements implementing the Convention. The Committee recalled that Standard A3.1, paragraph 21, allows exemptions only where they are expressly permitted in the Standard and only for particular circumstances in which such exemptions can be clearly justified on strong grounds and subject to protecting the seafarers’ health and safety. The Committee requested the Government to review its legislation in order to ensure that exemptions are only permitted in full compliance with Standard A3.1 and to specify, when relevant, if consultations with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations have taken place. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Article 115-4 of the Rule of Ship Appliance requires that crew rooms and mess rooms shall be equipped with skylights, ports, etc. for proper natural lighting. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that crew rooms include sleeping rooms and mess rooms as provided for in Article 110 of the said Rule. While taking note of the Government’s indications, the Committee observes that Articles 115-4 and 115-4-2 also provide that the maritime authority may grant exceptions taking into account the structure of the ship, mode of navigation, etc. The Committee further notes that the examples of exemptions provided by the Government do not describe in detail the “circumstances in which such exemptions can be clearly justified” or the “strong grounds” required by Standard A3.1, paragraph 21. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all exemptions from the requirements of Regulation 3.1 are limited to the cases and conditions provided for in Standard A3.1, paragraphs 20 and 21 and requests the Government to provide a detailed list of the types of exemptions granted by type of vessel.

Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2, paragraphs 2 (c), 3 and 4. Food and catering. Training. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, according to Article 1 of the Ordinance for persons assigned for providing food on board ships, a certificate of ship’s cook is required only for seafarers assuming a position of supervision in ships which navigate in “ocean going area or greater coasting area”. Recalling that Standard A3.2, paragraphs 2(c), 3 and 4, requires that catering staff be properly trained or instructed and that ship’s cooks are trained, qualified and competent, including through the completion of a training course approved or recognized by the competent authority, the Committee requested the Government to provide additional information as regards the requirements for being recruited as a ship’s cook, even if not in a position of supervision. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that concerning those who are recruited as catering staff but not in a position of supervision, maritime authorities require that they shall have the basic knowledge of the business concerning cooking in ships. The Committee also notes that the Government further refers to circular notices (Kokukaiun No. 156 and No. 158, February 28, 2013) which provide that the following three personnel are those who have the basic knowledge: (i) a person who has passed the onboard cooking test, or a person who has graduated from the Chef/Administrative Work Course of Incorporated Administrative Agency Kaiin Gakko; (ii) a person who completed following courses: (a) “Cooking Training for Stewards” at the Institution on Maritime Technical Education Agency; (b) “Onboard cooking Education Course” at Onomichi Marine Techno; (c) “Onboard Cooking Training” or “Onboard Cooks Training” at Japan Seamen’s Service; and (iii) a person who completed education using the text “Sennai no Shokuji Kanri” (Onboard Dietary Management) pursuant to the 2006 Maritime Labour Convention, as issued by the Association for Accident Prevention among Seafarers, in company, ship or places similar to them. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the District Transport Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, issues “Certificate of Completion of Training for Persons assigned for Cooking” after confirming that those who have the basic knowledge satisfy the requirements mentioned above. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to provide a copy of the circular notices (Kokukaiun No. 156 and No. 158, February 28, 2013) that establish the requirements for being recruited as a ship’s cook.

Regulation 4.1 and the Code. Medical care on board and ashore. The Committee noted in its previous comment the Government’s statement that seafarers’ health protection is ensured under the Seafarers Act, the Mariners’ Insurance Act and the Regulations for Labour Safety and Health of Seafarers. Noting however the absence of detailed information on how the requirements of the Convention have been implemented, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the specific provisions giving effect to Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(a) and (b). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the provisions of Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(a) of the Convention are covered by Article 81 paragraphs 1, 3 and 4, Articles 89 to 92 and 95 of the Seafarers Act, Articles 53, 54 and 59 to 62 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Seafarers Act, Articles 30 to 32 and 41 to 43 of the Ordinance on Industrial Safety and Health, and Article 29 of the Mariners Insurance Act. It further notes that the Government indicates that the requirement of Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention is covered by Article 81 paragraph 1, Articles 82 and 82-2 of the Seafarers Act, Articles 53 and 54 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Seafarers Act, Articles 7, 8 items 3 and 4, 32, 42-2 and 43 of the Ordinance on Industrial Safety and Health. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(c). Medical care on board and ashore. Right to visit a doctor or dentist in ports of call. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide more information on seafarers’ rights to visit a qualified medical doctor or dentist without delay in ports of call and to provide a copy of the relevant circular notice mentioned by the Government which gives effect to this requirement. The Committee notes the provisions of circular notice (Kokukaiun No.156, February 28, 2013) “Acts on Reforming a Part of the Seafarers Act with the Ratification of the Maritime Labour Convention” which provides in paragraph 5 that based on the Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(c) of the MLC, 2006, a shipowner must give seafarers the right to visit a qualified medical doctor or a dentist without delay in ports of call, where practicable. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(a). Medical care on board and ashore. Minimum Requirements. Medicine Chest, medical equipment and medical guide. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that ships’ medicine chests, medical equipment and medical guides are properly maintained and subject to periodical and intermediate inspections by virtue of Articles 81(1), 100-2 and 100-4 of the Seafarers Act as well as of Articles 53 and 54 of the Ordinance for enforcement of the said Act. Noting that Articles 100-2 and 100-4 refer to periodical inspection and intermediate inspections taking place every two to five years and that Articles 53 and 54 of the Ordinance do not specify the frequency of inspections of ships’ medicine chests, medical equipment and medical guides, the Committee requested the Government to explain how it gives effect to Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(a). The Committee notes that the Government refers to Article 8 of the Regulations for Labour Safety and Health of Seafarers which provides that inspection and maintenance of medicine and other medical goods and medical publications shall be part of the nominated health supervisor’s duties and that this inspection shall be conducted annually under the safety management manual based on ISM Code. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 4.2 and Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 2. Shipowners’ liability. Expenses of medical care and board and lodging away from home. Limits. The Committee noted in its previous comment that Article 89(1) of the Seafarers Act provides that, when a seafarer suffers an injury or illness in the course of the duties, the shipowner shall provide medical care at the shipowner’s expense or meet the necessary expenses for medical care until the said injury or illness has healed. However, paragraph 2 of the same Article limits the shipowner’s liability to a period of three months in the case of an injury or illness “outside the course of duties while the employment continues”. The Committee recalled that Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 2, allows for national laws or regulations to limit the liability of the shipowner (for medical care and board and lodging expenses) to a period which shall not be less than 16 weeks from the day of injury or the commencement of the sickness and requested the Government to indicate how it ensures that this requirement of the Convention is implemented in particular with respect to illness, whether incurred during or outside of service. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that concerning illness incurred otherwise than in the service of the ship, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 89 of the Seafarers Act, expenses for medical care are paid to seafarers during three months and as all seafarers must be covered by the mariners insurance, under Article 95 of the same Act, the shipowner shall pay expenses for medical care through the mariners’ insurance. The Government further indicates that, under paragraph 3 of Article 53 of the Mariners Insurance Act, expenses for medical care are paid to seafarers during the period from the day of disembarkment until the end of the month to which the day of the third month belongs. After that, if seafarers retain their status as seafarers, expenses for medical care are paid through the mariner’s insurance. If they are no longer seafarers, expenses continue to be paid through the mariners’ insurance as the insured by the Health Insurance Voluntary Continuation System, or through the general onshore medical insurance. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 4.4 and Standard A4.4, paragraph 3. Access to shore-based welfare facilities. Welfare boards. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there are currently four shore-based facilities operating in the country. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on how welfare facilities and services are regularly reviewed in order to ensure that they are appropriate in the light of changes in the needs of seafarers resulting from technical, operational and other developments in the shipping industry, as provided for under Standard A4.4, paragraph 3 of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.3 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Maritime Labour Certificate and Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that Article 100-3 of the Seafarers Act specifies the scope of inspections in order to deliver the maritime labour certificate, in accordance with Regulation 5.1.3 and the Code and Appendix A5-I which lists the 16 areas to be inspected and approved by the flag State before certifying a ship. It noted, however, that none of the items listed under Article 100-3(1) mentions accommodation, on-board recreational facilities, or the use of private recruitment and placement services, which are three of the 14 areas subject to inspection prior to certification and requested the Government to provide additional information on the provisions requiring that these three items be inspected prior to certification. Concerning accommodation and on-board recreational facilities, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to Article 100-3, paragraph 1, item (xxxii) which provides that effective Ship Inspection Certificate stipulated in paragraph 1, Article 9 of the Ship Safety Act or Temporary Navigation Permit stipulated in paragraph 2 of the same Article shall be obtained. The Government indicates that accommodation and recreational facilities are inspected in accordance with the Ship Safety Act and that during a Maritime Labour Inspection, the issuance or not of a Ship Inspection Certificate or Temporary Navigation Permit is inspected. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions that require accommodation and on-board recreational facilities to be among the matters that shall be inspected in order for a Ship Inspection Certificate or Temporary Navigation Permit to be issued. With regard to the private recruitment and placement services, the Government indicates that the employment of the following seafarers is prohibited in accordance with the provision of Article 32-2, which is inspected in accordance with the provision of Article 100-3, paragraph 1, item (ii): (i) Seafarers who use the domestic seafarer’s recruitment and job placement agency without authorization based on Seafarers Employment Security Act; and (ii) Seafarers who use the foreign seafarers recruitment and job placement agency which is not compatible for the standards of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 5.1.4 and Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7. Flag State responsibilities. Inspection and enforcement. Powers of inspectors. The Committee noted, in its previous comment, that Article 101 of the Seafarers Act bestows the power to prohibit a ship from leaving port on the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism and requested the Government to specify if inspectors are empowered to detain a ship, as required under Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to Article 108, paragraph 2 of the Seafarers Act which provides that seafarers' labour inspector shall immediately exercise the authority of the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism when imperious need exists to ensure the safety of the ship at sea, pursuant to Article 101 of the Seafarers Act. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 5.2.1 and the Code. Port State responsibilities. Inspections in port. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide additional information concerning the method used for assessing the effectiveness of the port State inspection and monitoring system for the purpose of reviewing compliance with the requirements of the Convention (including seafarers’ rights), as required under Regulation 5.2.1, paragraph 5. The Committee also requested the Government to provide information on the qualifications and training required for carrying out port State control duties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that with respect to the effective inspection and monitoring system by the port state, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism has established the “Quality Management System with continual improvement” based on the requirements of ISO9001, and assesses the quality management system of the Maritime Administrations including Port State Control (PSC) on the basis of PDCA cycle. With respect to the qualification of PSC officers, national law provides the appointment standards of PSC officers in accordance with IMO Resolution A.1119 (30). Specifically, they shall have the career as Ship Inspector or Safety Management and Seafarers Labour Inspector, and required to complete the training course based on IMO model course, and on the job training. The Quality Management System improved continuously provides the standards of training programme including knowledge of the MLC, 2006 and there are induction training course, intermediate training and practical operation training. The Committee takes note of this information.