Navigating The Future: Legal Implications Of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (Mass) In Nigeria

Celestine Ogbonnaya & Adizua Vianney¹

INTRODUCTION:

The international maritime industry is rapidly evolving with the introduction of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships ("MASS") being a significant shift in the manner in which goods are transported across the seas. These vessels, designed to operate with little or no human intervention, are already being tested in several jurisdictions and have signalled a future where automation could significantly shape international shipping. The maritime industry has consistently embraced innovation and cutting-edge technologies. These autonomous ships can be controlled remotely or by seafarers on board.²

For Nigeria, with its seaports and burgeoning interest in the blue economy, the emergence of MASS presents both opportunities and challenges. While such technology promises increased efficiency, lower cost, and enhanced safety, it also presents fundamental legal problems. For instance, what is the legal framework for a ship without a crew? Who bears the liability in the event of a collision or an environmental hazard, and how does existing laws like the Merchant Shipping Act deal with such advancement?

This article examines the concept of MASS within the broader context of international maritime regulation and considers whether Nigeria's current legal and institutional framework is equipped to address the unique risks and responsibilities associated with autonomous shipping. As the industry prepares itself for this new phase of innovation, it is essential that Nigeria positions itself not just as a follower, but as an active participant in shaping the legal future of the maritime industry.

UNDERSTANDING MASS: DEGREES OF AUTONOMY AND TECHNOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS

Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships ("MASS") are commercial vessels that operate with little or no human intervention, using sensors, software, and communication systems to navigate, avoid collisions and perform essential vessel functions.³ By leveraging advanced technologies, MASS are transforming traditional ship operations by significantly reducing or even eliminating the need for direct human control. To properly understand the legal challenges these vessels present, it is instructive to first understand how these ships are classified according to their levels of autonomy and the underlying technologies facilitating their operations.

DEGREES OF AUTONOMY

The International Maritime Organization ("IMO") divides MASS into four degrees of autonomy, depending on the level of control by humans versus machines:⁴

1. Degree one: A vessel equipped with automated processes and decision-making support. Seafarers are present on board to manage and oversee shipboard systems and functions. Certain operations may be automated and, at times, conducted without supervision, yet seafarers remain on board, prepared to assume control.
2. Degree two: A remotely operated vessel with seafarers on board. The ship is managed and operated from a different location, while seafarers are still present on board to take control and to operate the shipboard systems and functions.
3. Degree three: A remotely operated vessel without seafarers on board. The ship is managed and operated from a different location, and there are no seafarers present on board.
4. Degree four: A fully autonomous vessel whose operating system is capable of making decisions and determining actions independently.

It is important to note that a ship might operate under different degrees of autonomy at different times depending on the situation, so these categories help regulators understand what level of regulation is needed at each stage.⁵

UNMANNED VS. AUTONOMOUS SHIPS

These terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but they have distinct meanings within the maritime sector. An Unmanned ship is a vessel that operates without a crew on board, typically controlled remotely from a shore-based facility. In contrast, an Autonomous ship is a vessel capable of navigating and operating independently, relying completely on artificial intelligence, with little or no remote human input.⁶ It is important to note that a ship may be uncrewed without being truly autonomous. In other words, while all autonomous ships are unmanned, not all unmanned ships meet the criteria to be considered autonomous.⁷

TECHNOLOGY BEHIND MASS

One important aspect of "MASS" is the electronic systems that enables it to achieve full autonomy. This electronic system can be broken into four main areas: sensing, communication, decision-making, and actuation.⁸

1. Sensing systems: These parts obtain data about the environment and about the ship itself. Sensing systems include individual sensors, such as cameras, radars, lidars, sonars, GPS, Inertial Measurement Units, etc. The output of the sensors results in useful data, the ship's position, speed, heading, attitude, status of the ship, and about external obstacles, objects, traffic, weather, and information on sea state.
2. Communication systems: These transmit and receive data to and from other channels. These communication channels include radios, satellites, cellular networks, wi-fi, and optical links. It allows the ship to communicate with other vessels, shore stations, or human operators. Communication is particularly useful for coordination, navigation, collision avoidance, search and rescue (SAR), and to conduct remote control of MASS.
3. Decision-making systems: These are responsible for processing data from sensing and communication systems, as well as generating commands for the vessel, encompassing computers, software algorithms, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. These systems empower the vessel to plan its course, carry out its mission, respond to unforeseen circumstances, and learn from its experiences.
4. Actuation systems: These systems implement the commands from the decision-making systems and manage the vessel's physical components, which consist of motors, propellers, rudders, thrusters, valves, pumps, and additional elements. These systems facilitate the vessel's movement, steering, stopping, buoyancy adjustments, and other operational actions.

The electronic systems of MASS are intricate and interrelated. They necessitate high levels of integration, reliability, security, and adaptability. Furthermore, they must adhere to international standards and regulations that guarantee their safety and compatibility with other maritime systems.

LEGAL FRAMEWORKS: THE GLOBAL REGULATORY LANDSCAPE FOR MARITIME AUTONOMOUS SURFACE SHIPS (MASS)

By evaluating the advantages of new and developing technologies alongside considerations of safety and security issues, environmental impact and the facilitation of international trade, the potential industry costs, and the effects on both onboard and ashore personnel, the IMO aims to incorporate these technologies into its regulatory framework. The Organization wants to make sure that the rapidly changing technological landscape is accurately reflected in the regulatory framework for MASS.⁹

In May 2021, the IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) completed a Regulatory Scoping Exercise (RSE) to identify how current IMO instruments like SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea), MARPOL (pollution rules), COLREGs (collision regulations), and STCW (crew training rules) apply to MASS.¹⁰ The RSE analyzed various degrees of autonomy and identified provisions that:¹¹

• Apply to MASS without preventing their operation.
• Apply to MASS but may require amendments or clarifications.
• Do not apply to MASS operations.

A significant finding was the need to clarify terms such as "master," "crew," and "responsible person," especially for higher degrees of autonomy where no crew is onboard. Pursuant to the RSE findings and recommendations, the IMO is currently developing a non-mandatory MASS Code, aiming for adoption in May 2026. This code will provide guidelines for the safe operation of autonomous ships, such as safety standards, operational procedures, and cybersecurity measures. Following an experience-building phase, a mandatory MASS Code is anticipated to be adopted by 1^st of July 2030 and come into force on 1^st of January 2032.¹²

The introduction of MASS into international maritime law gives rise to some legal issues and challenges, including the determination of liability for accidents involving unmanned ships and updating the training for remote controllers. Such issues require amendments to be made to existing conventions like SOLAS, COLREGs, and STCW to ensure their relevance in the era of autonomous shipping.

The IMO's proactive policy of scrutinizing and amending maritime legislation is imperative for the smooth and safe integration of MASS into global shipping. The ongoing collaboration between member states and industry stakeholders will be important in developing a comprehensive legal framework that addresses the complexities of autonomous maritime operations.

NIGERIA'S MARITIME INDUSTRY: ARE WE READY FOR MASS?

Currently, there are no specific legal frameworks regulating MASS in Nigeria, this is due to the fact that it is still a novel concept around the maritime space. The Merchant Shipping Act 2007 and Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) Act 2007 are the principal legislations governing the Nigeria's maritime industry.

The Merchant Shipping Act ("MSA") 2007¹³ defines a ship as follows:

The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency ("NIMASA") Act 2007¹⁴ also defines a vessel as:

The definition of a "ship" under the above acts is wide and encompassing, but the two Acts do not address the unique concerns of MASS.¹⁵

However, both acts envisaged MASS in their respective definitions of a ship. The provision of ship registration, safety standards, and crew certification under the MSA¹⁶ will play a crucial role in establishing a formidable legal framework. Nonetheless, it is evident that the provisions of both acts are tailored to traditional manned ships and may fail to take into account the nuances of autonomous ship operations.

ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF MASS:

1. Cost reduction: There is a significant reduction in crew expenses such as salaries, accommodation, feeding and training of seafarers. There will be minimal or no crew on board, thereby reducing the daily cost of maintenance of the ships, unlike conventional ships.
2. Enhanced Safety: MASS are safer than conventional ships owing to the sophisticated technologies they use. These cutting-edge technologies reduce human errors as they are programmed with utmost precision. The use of GPS and other sensing systems enables the vessel to detect any pending environmental hazards that might harm the ship. The use of technology and artificial intelligence has increased the safe navigation of the autonomous ships and reduced the chances of a collision and other hazards.
3. Improved efficiency in service delivery: The autonomous ships are efficient in delivery. This is because of the presence of modern technology which increases its speed and output.
4. Reduction of carbon emission and environmental preservation: According to the International Council on Clean Transport, pollution from shipping contributes to about 60,000 premature deaths per year. Container ships feature prominently in causing shipping pollution given that such ships burn up to 66 gallons of fuel per minute while in motion.¹⁷ Reducing carbon emissions from MASS is a critical step towards combating climate change and meeting international environmental targets, such as those set by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). MASS is designed and built with modern technologies to ensure zero carbon emissions.

ANTICIPATED CHALLENGES THAT MAY FACE THE INTEGRATION OF MASS INTO NIGERIA'S MARITIME SECTOR:¹⁸

1. Regulatory Gaps: Existing laws may not adequately address the operational realities of autonomous ships, especially concerning crew requirements, liability considerations, command structures and the attribution of liability in the event of accidents or system failures. These legal gaps raise critical questions about compliance with international conventions such as the SOLAS and STCW, which assume the presence of human crew on board. Moreover, the absence of clear guidelines on the legal status of autonomous systems, remote operators and artificial intelligence decision-making, further complicates issues of accountability, insurance and maritime safety enforcement.
2. Technological Infrastructure: MASS rely heavily on advanced and sophisticated technological systems, including integrated communication networks, remote monitoring infrastructure, artificial intelligence, and robust cybersecurity measures to ensure safe and efficient operation. However, existing maritime legislation does not explicitly address these technological dependencies, leaving significant regulatory gaps in areas such as data integrity, system interoperability, satellite connectivity, and protection against cyber threats. The absence of clear legal standards for the design, maintenance, and auditing of these systems poses serious challenges to operational safety, regulatory compliance, and international maritime security.
3. International Alignment: Nigeria must take proactive steps to harmonize its domestic maritime legislation with evolving international standards and best practices to ensure the seamless integration of MASS into global shipping ecosystem. This includes alignment developed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), such as guidelines on MASS and addressing gaps in areas like vessel registration, certification, remote operations, and liability attribution. Without such alignment, Nigeria risks regulatory isolation, reduced competitiveness in international trade and potential non-compliance with global maritime obligations.
4. Risk and Liability: The emergence of MASS is set to raise complex legal questions concerning liability in the event of collision and damages. A central issue will be who should bear the responsibility under such circumstances. Will liability rest with the vessel owners, charterers, ship builders or the developers of the artificial intelligence systems that control the ships? These questions are not only inevitable but also critical to the future legal framework governing maritime operations in Nigeria. Such a legal framework needs to adapt to ensure clarity and fairness in the apportionment of liability in an era where human control over vessels becoming increasingly limited or non-existent.
5. Security: Security remains a critical concern in the deployment and operation of MASS in Nigeria. Specifically, the level of protection required for such vessels along with their vulnerability to technological failures and cyber security breaches pose significant challenges to their safe and effective utilization within Nigerian waters. A major issue lies in the ability of MASS to navigate safely through high-risk maritime zones in Nigeria. A concern that becomes more pronounced in the absence of a Ship Security Officer (SSO), whose presence is mandated under the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code. While technologies such as the Ship Security Alert System (SSAS) and the Ship Security Reporting System (SSRS) offer advanced tools to bolster maritime security, they are not a complete substitute for the human role in ensuring vessel security, which remains vital.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To address these challenges, Nigeria should consider the following:

1. Legislative Reforms: There is a pressing need to revise the NIMASA Act 2007 to incorporate specific provisions that address the operation, regulation, and oversight of MASS. These reforms should clearly define the legal status of MASS, establish regulatory responsibilities, and provide a framework for issues such as certification, crewing requirements (where applicable), liability, cybersecurity, and compliance with international conventions. This will ensure that Nigeria's maritime legal framework evolves in line with global technological advancements and emerging standards for autonomous shipping.
2. Capacity Building: To effectively implement and regulate the use of MASS, Nigeria must invest in targeted capacity-building initiatives. These include technological infrastructure, training and upskilling of maritime professionals, legal practitioners and regulatory personnel on the technical, legal and operational aspects of MASS. Institutions such as NIMASA, the Nigerian Navy and Maritime training academies should develop specialized curricular and certification programs tailored to autonomous shipping. Additionally, collaborative partnerships with international maritime organizations, research institutions and MASS technology developers will be crucial in enhancing domestic expertise and ensuring alignment with global best practices.
3. Stakeholders' Engagements: The successful integration of MASS into Nigeria's maritime sector requires inclusive and continuous stakeholders' engagements. Key stakeholders including government agencies, maritime operators, insurers, legal experts, academia and seafarers' unions must be actively involved in the policy formulation, legislative reform and regulatory design processes. Establishing structured platforms for dialogue, consultations and feedback will help ensure that diverse perspectives are considered, potential risks are identified and practical, balanced solutions are developed. Such engagements foster transparency, build trust, and promote shared ownership of the transition toward autonomous maritime operations.
4. International Collaboration: Given the cross-border nature of maritime operations, Nigeria must actively pursue international collaboration with maritime organizations to effectively regulate and integrate MASS. Engagement with international bodies such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the international Association of Classification Societies (ICAS) and regional maritime organizations is essential to harmonize domestic frameworks with evolving global standards. Bilateral and multilateral partnerships should also be fostered to facilitate knowledge exchange, joint research, capacity building and the adoption of best practices. By participating in international regulatory development and pilot programs for autonomous shipping, Nigeria can ensure it remains aligned with global trends while safeguarding its maritime interests and enhancing its competitiveness within the international shipping space.
5. Development of MASS-Specific Regulations: There is a critical need for the development of dedicated regulations tailored to the unique operational, technical and legal characteristics of MASS. These regulations should clearly define the categories and levels of autonomy, establish safety and security requirements, set standards for remote and autonomous navigation systems, set standards for remote and autonomous navigation systems and address issues such as liability, registration, manning exemptions, regulatory frameworks must account for cybersecurity, data protection, environmental shipping systems. NIMASA, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders and international bodies should lead the formulation of these regulations to ensure that Nigeria's maritime regime remains adaptive, future-ready and consistent with international developments in autonomous shipping.

By actively addressing these issues, Nigeria can position itself as a frontrunner in the adoption of autonomous maritime technologies.

CONCLUSION:

The advent of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships "MASS") signals a new era in maritime operations, with possibilities for increased efficiency and innovation. However, to fully capitalize on these benefits, Nigeria must actively adapt its legal and regulatory frameworks to address the unique challenges posed by autonomous ships. Through targeted legislative reform, capacity building, and collaboration between stakeholders, Nigeria can position itself at the forefront of autonomous maritime operations, ensuring safety, security, and compliance in this evolving landscape. This forward-looking approach will not only enhance the country's maritime competitiveness but also contribute to safer and more efficient global shipping.

Footnotes

1. Celestine Ogbonnaya and Adizua Vianney are both associates at Alliance Law Firm, Lagos, Nigeria.

2.https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Autonomous-shipping.aspx Accessed 10^th June 2025

3.https://www.international-maritime-rescue.org/news/maritime-autonomous-surface-ships-mass-and-sar Accessed 10^th June 2025

4.https://www.international-maritime-rescue.org/news/maritime-autonomous-surface-ships-mass-and-sar Accessed 12^th June 2025

5. Ibid.

6.https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=oceantrends Accessed 13^th June 2025

7.https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2022/09/08/are-autonomous-ships-and-vehicles-unamanned-or-uncrewed/ Accessed 13^th June 2025

8.https://www.international-maritime-rescue.org/news/maritime-autonomous-surface-ships-mass-and-sar

9.https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Autonomous-shipping.aspx Accessed 13^th June 2025

10.https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/pages/MASSRSE2021.aspx?utm_source= Accessed 13^th June 2025

11.https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/Pages/LEG-108th-.aspx?utm Accessed 13^th June 2025

12.https://www.marinelink.com/news/msc-advances-autonomous-ship-code-520397?utm

13. Section 445

14. Section 64

15.https://www.academia.edu/91844448/THE_USE_OF_AUTONOMOUS_VESSELS_IN_NIGERIA_CHALLENGES_AND?utm_

16. Sections 5(1) and 34 (1)

17. t https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/recode/22973218/container-swhipping-industry-climate-changeemissions-maersk Accessed on 16^th June

18. Ibid.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.