The Chair said that compliance and enforcement remains one of the most difficult, yet important issues for discussion. Once agreement is reached on the principles for conservation and management measures, governments must ensure compliance and enforcement of those measures. The primary responsibility is that of the flag State, and that is contained in Article 18. Japan said that he had a problem with Article 18, paragraph (1)(c), because of its legal implications. In the Japanese criminal law system, pending the outcome of the court decision, anyone is presumed innocent until the final judgment is rendered. Basic human rights have to be protected. The EU supported Japan concerning the presumption of innocence. Malta said that his government had not decided on a definitive position on a legally binding instrument, and reserved his position on this Article. Poland, supporting Japan, said that we cannot prejudge anything and suggested deleting subparagraph (1)(c). Peru argued against deletion. For subparagraph (1)(c), he suggested that a vessel should be prohibited from fishing on the high seas until all outstanding penalties have been meted out. Papua New Guinea said that in paragraph (3), sanctions should be of sufficient "severity" instead of the more general word "gravity". Chile supported Article 18. He said the Papua New Guinea amendment moved in the right direction, but that he favored Peru's suggestion of imposition of "penalties" rather than "procedures". The Philippines said sanctions would affect the fishing vessel's crew. Some provision in Article 18 is needed to provide for their protection. Japan said that since a vessel may fish in more than one fishery, sanctions should be limited to the particular fishery involved. Only the flag State may bring offenders to trial and impose penalties.
The Chair turned to Article 19, which deals with international cooperation and enforcement. The Russian Federation said cooperation and enforcement is central to our work. He said the Chair's draft could be strengthened if inclusion were made to limit uncontrolled fishing. Japan introduced an amendment to address a lacuna in the US proposal on compliance and enforcement concerning vessels violating an EEZ and then remaining on the high seas since the US provision does not automatically give the coastal State the right to inspect the vessel on the high seas. Peru introduced a new Article 19 (bis) to strengthen conservation and management measures within the framework of regional or subregional arrangements or organizations.
[Return to start of article]