by Nicasio Angelo Agustin
The typical peaceful Sunday past was wracked with news of yet another maritime tragedy. Super Ferry 9, en route to Iloilo from General Santos City, was reported to have listed 35 degrees at its starboard side before finally sinking about 10 nautical miles west off Banga Point in Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte. With a final fatality count of nine, the fact that it happened on the ninth month of the ninth year of this millennium and with the ill-fated ship bearing a number nine on its side, I could not help but think that fate might have had a hand in this unfortunate event.
Just hours after the news broke out, speculations were rife as to the cause of the incident. Some immediately pointed to the usual suspect: overloading – bringing back horrific scenes from the recent Puerto Galera ferry disaster. Others were shaken by the thought of yet another terrorist attack, as the shores of Western Zamboanga are known to be Abu Sayyaf territory. Other theorists chose to lament the deteriorated quality of passenger vessels plying the nation’s 7,100 islands.
Not overloaded
Reviewing the statements and available information about the incident, let us examine the facts to determine what really caused the sinking so that we may be able to learn more painful lessons – yet again.
The 7,268-ton vessel has an approved capacity of 1,120 persons and 209 TEUs (Twenty-foot equivalent units) of cargo. Based on records and the passenger manifesto, SF9 left the port of GenSan with 847 passengers, 117 crew members and four sea marshalls carrying 186 TEUs of cargo. In essence, it was only at 86.4% human, and 89% cargo capacity – quite a far stretch from speculations of overloading.
No terrorist attack
On the other hand, and in contrast to fears of a terrorist attack, accounts of the passengers themselves reveal that no explosion was heard before the ship listed on its starboard side. Some even shared their observation that the ship was already askew before it even left GenSan, fueling speculation that either there was a hole in the ship’s hull or that it was improperly loaded. Nevertheless, Erden Ferrer of Aboitiz unequivocally stated that a hole in the ship’s hull or improper loading would mean that it would not be cleared to sail from GenSan by the Coast Guard.
As to the oft-questioned quality of Philippine passenger vessels, it cannot be denied that what ply our seas are not brand new and top-of-the-line. The terms “luxurious” and “entertaining,” used to describe cruise ships catering to vacationers from developed nations, are not synonymous with our ROROs and ferries. Nevertheless, old and second-hand they may be, there are standards that must be upheld before a ship is deemed sea-worthy. It is these standards that every passenger ship leaving every port in this nation must first pass before it can be allowed to sail – standards that every inspector should uphold before affixing his signature on every clearance he issues.
Wanted: CSI probers
We will probably never know for sure the cause of the SF9 sinking until the ship is rescued from the murks of the abyss and a thorough, CSI-type autopsy on the vessel is conducted. Let the experts do their jobs and, hopefully, their findings will open the floodgates for the upgrading and improvement of the MARINA, ISPS and Coast Guard standards, procedures and protocols before another ferry can leave our ports.
Aside from standards and protocols, another thing that I believe is very much worth looking into is the issue of insurance for passengers and cargo that will be affected by these mishaps. ATS is offering an eleven thousand peso package for each of its 838 survivors to cover baggage loss and additional financial assistance – coupled with other expenses; the tragedy will cost the company at least ten million pesos. However, ATS is only required to pay every survivor six thousand as given by law. Is this minimum enough?
The question begs us to examine if our shipping industry can become world-standard by conforming to the new standards set by the Athens Protocol. When another SF9 happens, who should bear the brunt of the burden – is it the company that is most liable? How heavy should the insurance company liability be? Should the bulk of insurance cost be shouldered by the passengers themselves or should it be borne by responsible corporate citizens?
I wonder what Ate Shawie would have to say about the Superferry that she had been indorsing for years now?
Feel free to send your comments to nic_agustin@yahoo.com.
