The Author tries to “think out of the box”, presenting “Sponsalia ex hoc mundo” (“Hand fastening out of this world”). The title reflects the view that the outer space sciences and the sea sciences are analytically separable, but practically interlinked. It might be observed in the context of space technology and satellite technics, a new system of management and government, as well as a new system of law and policy. Nowadays, the outer space infrastructure (the use of artificial Earth satellites for Direct Television Broadcasting, communications, remote sensing, navigation, military missiles) affects infrastructure of our Planet, including maritime infrastructure. There is, therefore, the need for a new face of integrated system of science and practice.

Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks came into force on 14th April 2015 and has been ratified by now by over 40 states across the world (among them Australia, China, India, South Africa and most of the EU countries). The convention provides legal framework for action taken by the Coastal States aiming at removal of wrecks posing danger or impediment to navigation, as well as to the marine environment, or damage to the coastline or related interests of one or more States.

The Convention fills the existing legal gap by enabling the States to remove wrecks beyond their territories (as well as within if States decide so). Beside the existing international regulations like Intervention Convention or UNCLOS, the Nairobi Convention clarifies the Costal State’s rights to remove wrecks from its EEZ if they pose a danger for safe navigation or marine environment. The Convention corresponds with mentioned conventions but also equips Coastal States with new legal instruments to deal with hazardous wrecks beyond their territory. The aim of the paper is to analyse the new rights and duties of states, as well as scope of the notion of navigational and environmental threats causes by wrecks. It will refer also to regulatory problems faced by the states implementing the Convention. Even if the Convention is to be applied to territorial sea, its multiple provisions are not. Moreover, the Convention leaves many important aspects unregulated. Those issues will be analysed from the perspective of a country which has not yet ratified the Convention, and will be confronted with the experience from other jurisdictions.

This article examines the meaning and evolution of the practical implementation of the ‘genuine link’ concept over the years since the rise of the flag-of-convenience (FOC) registries in the 1920s. The author notes that while the competition between Flag States become fiercer, the regulations on ship safety, pollution prevention or shipboard working and living conditions are becoming standardized and ubiquitous. By being regulated by international instruments, in effect restricting regulatory powers of Flag States. Likewise, the enforcement of these provisions is becoming internationalized – with the omnipresence of classification societies and introduction of PSC regimes. At the same time, author identifies a lack of adequate regulations in respect of employment of seafarers, most notably wages and social security contributions, both at the national (Flag State) and international level. This legal loophole encourages Port States to introduce local solutions, irrespective of Flag State regulations. Such developments weaken the ‘genuineness’ of the ‘genuine link’ between ship and its Flag State.