Vindicating India's stand, a ruling by Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding (IOMOU), a grouping of 17 maritime nations, came as a result of India's appeal against the 26-day detention of the vessel by Iran, local news reports said.
India, which is part of IOMOU, along with Iran and 15 other nations, had contended that the detention was in transgression of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other international pacts.
According to the IOMOU’s detention review panel, the vessel did not voluntarily reach the Iranian port.
"The panel members unanimously agreed that the information provided indicates that the vessel was not voluntarily in port, as such this should be considered as action by a coastal state under Article 220 and 224 of UNCLOS," the IOMOU said in a communication to the Indian Director General of Shipping. "The panel was, therefore, of the view that the inspection and detention should be removed from the IOCIS database by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The IOCIS (Indian Ocean Computerised Information System) database covers information related to vessels that have violated compliance with international maritime conventions in foreign ports.
Under the rules, the detention review panel would only consider the procedural and technical aspects of the Port State Control (PSC) inspection based on the information provided by the flag state, its recognised organisation and the port state.
India, in its appeal, had told the body that the vessel on an ‘innocent’ voyage from Basrah (Iraq) to Vishakhapatnam (India) when she was intercepted by Iranian navy on 12th August beyond Iran’s territorial waters and forcibly diverted her towards Nowrouz oil fields. She was later told to anchor at Bandar Abbas.
The Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) owned vessel was held on charges of pollution. She was released on 6th September after a letter of undertaking was sent by SCI to the Iranian Ports and Maritime Organisation.
Refuting charges of pollution, in its appeal India had said that on the basis of satellite pictures of the alleged oil slick, ‘Desh Shanti's’ position was far away from the alleged location on the date in question.