I think these are important questions. Who is ultimately responsible? The article didn’t even dig deeper into the salvor and P&I. (Once the vessel is determined by the associated P&I Club to be a loss, is it then the insurers responsibility for wreck disposal?)
But, more importantly, if wrecks can just be towed to sea and sunk, why would anyone pay for salvage? There would be huge savings by not having to pay for proper wreck removal, towing, disposal, etc. If we are saying this is fully legal, would it have been fine to tow the Costa Concordia to deeper water and let her sink, for example? Why even take ships to the breakers in Alang when you could just send them to the deep?
These international agreements were written for a reason. In the complex world of ship ownership/management/registration/oversight/insurance I get that it is certainly a question as to whom is ultimately responsible at which stage in the lifecycle, and which regulations are applicable. But if the Wakashio situation is to be unquestioned, I don’t see it as a good thing.