New Delhi, May,
2026.
The Directorate
General of Shipping (DG Shipping), under the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and
Waterways, Government of India, convened a high-level meeting with exporters
and industry stakeholders on 17 April 2026 to address the ongoing crisis
arising from disruptions in maritime services linked to geopolitical
developments in the Middle East.
The meeting formally recognized that the
challenges faced by exporters are systemic, widespread, and not isolated
incidents, cutting across sectors, ports, and shipment categories, and
require policy-level intervention. Exporters across industries—including
agri commodities, food products, FMCG, and handicrafts—highlighted severe
operational and financial distress resulting from unilateral actions by global
shipping lines.
Containers remain stranded across ports, ICDs,
and transshipment hubs due to service suspensions, rerouting, and cargo
diversions. Despite the disruption in cargo movement, exporters continue to
incur detention, demurrage, and multiple ancillary charges.
Ms. Priyanka
Mittal, Chairperson, Basmati Rice Farmers & Exporters Development Forum,
stated:“We appreciate DG Shipping’s proactive step in formally documenting
exporter grievances and acknowledging the scale and seriousness of the issue.
However, the situation on the ground continues to remain extremely challenging
for exporters.”
Exporters reported widespread imposition of
charges that are arbitrary, non-transparent, and disproportionate to services
rendered, including war risk surcharges (WRS), detention, demurrage, congestion
levies, and transshipment-related costs. War risk surcharges alone have ranged
from USD 800 to USD 6,000 per container, often imposed without prior notice or
revised retrospectively. In several cases, cumulative charges have escalated to
60–70% of cargo value, rendering exports commercially unviable.
Operational disruptions have further aggravated
the situation, with shipping lines unilaterally:
●
Diverting cargo
to alternate ports such as Jebel Ali, Sohar, and Salalah
●
Holding containers
at transshipment hubs without clarity on onward movement
●
Returning
containers to origin ports (“back-to-town” scenarios)
These decisions have been taken without adequate
consultation with exporters, while the financial burden arising from such
disruptions continues to be borne entirely by them.
“Exporters are effectively being asked to absorb
open-ended financial liability for circumstances entirely beyond their control.
This is not sustainable and requires urgent correction,” Ms. Mittal added.
A key concern highlighted during the meeting was
the lack of transparency and absence of standardized norms governing
shipping line charges. Exporters noted that charges are frequently imposed
without adequate justification or cost breakdown, and often communicated after
cargo movement has commenced, creating significant uncertainty and contractual
risk.
The discussions also brought out a critical
structural gap in India’s maritime ecosystem, including the absence of a
clear regulatory framework governing shipping line practices, lack of
standardization in the application of detention and demurrage, and absence of
defined protocols for handling force majeure situations and cargo diversions.
“In this context, the continued imposition of
charges without commensurate service delivery raises important questions of
alignment with the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and carrier
obligations embedded within India’s maritime regulatory framework, including
the Merchant Shipping Act,” Ms. Mittal noted.
Exporters, particularly MSMEs, highlighted a significant
imbalance in bargaining power between large global shipping lines and
individual exporters, leaving them with limited recourse and exposing them to
disproportionate financial risks. The ongoing accumulation of charges has
created what many described as a “running meter,” severely impacting working
capital and, in some cases, forcing exporters to consider abandoning cargo.
Beyond immediate financial stress, the situation
is straining export commitments, disrupting long-standing buyer relationships,
and undermining India’s credibility as a reliable supplier in global markets.
DG Shipping informed participants that complaints
have been formally registered, assigned unique tracking mechanisms, and will be
consolidated for submission to the Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG), DGFT, and
other relevant authorities for policy-level consideration. Industry bodies
including FIEO have also submitted consolidated representations reflecting the
widespread nature of the issue.
While acknowledging the facilitative role played
by DG Shipping, the industry has urged time-bound and decisive intervention,
including:
●
Ensuring that
charges are strictly linked to actual services rendered
●
Directing
shipping lines to release and allow return of containers without linkage to
disputed charges
●
Establishing clear
regulatory guidelines for treatment of cargo during force majeure and
geopolitical disruptions
●
Introducing standardized
norms and transparency requirements for shipping line charges
“Immediate relief is essential to prevent further
financial damage. At the same time, this situation presents an opportunity to
address long-standing structural gaps and create a more transparent, balanced,
and resilient maritime trade framework for India,” Ms. Mittal said.
The industry emphasized the need for a collaborative,
rules-based approach, with regulators, shipping lines, and exporters
working together to ensure continuity of trade while upholding fairness and
accountability.
Exporters remain hopeful that the ongoing
engagement will lead to timely, structured, and enforceable solutions
that safeguard India’s agri, FMCG, and MSME export sectors—critical pillars
supporting farmer incomes, employment, and the broader economy.
“If left
unaddressed, such practices risk setting a precedent that could undermine
confidence in India’s maritime trade framework and distort fair market
conduct,” Ms Mittal concluded.