ENB:07:07
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
IV. COMPLIANCE WITH CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Australia said that improved flag State enforcement should not be neglected. Other issues that must be addressed include: adoption of national measures to ensure compliance; fishing licenses or permits; identification and marking of vessels; global and regional agreements on catch; and funding of scientific research. Poland said that licenses or permits to control fishing (IV(b)) should be issued by flag States, not regional organizations. Norway said that there was a certain degree of overlap between Items IV and V. Enforcement action by port States is very important and Norway has taken legislative action to implement the relevant rules of the 1982 Convention. He suggested that IV(f) be amended to include "other mechanisms of cooperation" in addition to investigating records of a vessel within a port. Gabon said with regard to licenses (IV(b)), that the fees collected within a region should go to the regional organization rather than to coastal States. Japan expressed reservations with IV(f). There are precedents for port State authority over ships that come under its jurisdiction with regard to activities that take place on the high seas, but it relates to cases of pollution discharges and UNCLOS does not provide for this kind of jurisdiction for fisheries.
On IV(e), Japan said the sharing of data should not be limited to the high seas but also occur within the EEZs. Regional organizations should coordinate methods of scientific research and data collection. Papua New Guinea agreed with Australian remarks that the issue of transshipment at sea should be dealt with. Chile said that in matters of enforcement, there needs to be a sense of proportion between crime and penalty, and yet, the legal and economic advantages for the State or nationals of the State fishing illegally within the regulated zone need to be addressed. Indonesia said there is a problem in identifying mechanisms to ensure compliance. Vessels known to have violated conservation measures could be blacklisted. More action should also be taken to discourage transshipment, particularly when it takes place very close to a coastal State.
The Philippines said that flag States should be very specific in their licensing as to the stock involved, the gear, the season, and the amount of catch allowed. Quotas can be shared, on an equitable basis, based on capacity, on historical rights, or on a bidding system. The EC suggested that IV(a),(b),(c), and (d) be grouped under three headings: regulation of access to an area through authorization, licenses and permits; the regulation of fishing activity, catch limits or effort limitations or a combination thereof; and the regulation of vessels. A good way to ensure compliance might be a "hail system", where a vessel announces its arrival in the fishing area.
Denmark said that Items II and III without IV and V are like Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark. He mentioned the particular problem with regard to flags of convenience; the importance of a hail system; and the problem of subsidization, sometimes combined with open registries. He also mentioned the possibility of sanctioning a ship that fishes legally, but whose sister ship is in an illegal situation.
Argentina said all States should include in their legislation a register of the vessels fishing on the high seas from their countries. Samoa said the Conference should seek the agreement that flag States accept the obligation of maintaining the regulation of their vessels on the high seas. Ukraine said that quotas and licensing on a national basis and inspections need to be actively supported. With regard to scientific activities, he suggested the establishment of a research fishing fleet.
Sweden supported the EC's recommendation to structure the recommendations in Items IV and V under three headings. He suggested that this Conference recommend to the General Assembly that it invite FAO to convene a committee on fisheries for an extraordinary session in the spring of 1994 to mobilize regional and subregional organizations to address compliance and enforcement. Morocco said that the provisions in both Items IV and V only have value if they are applied effectively. It is important to define responsibilities and obligations of fishing States.
The Secretary-General of the Permanent South Pacific Commission said that regional organizations such as his should take measures necessary to conserve stocks in areas adjacent to EEZs. The rights and interests of coastal States must be protected. Quotas should be established based on periodic assessment of the fish stocks. Chile mentioned that paragraph 21 of L.11 discusses the process of international evaluation and suggests that regional organizations submit annual reports to COFI (FAO), which will make an inventory of outstanding issues and formulate recommendations, as appropriate. The Russian Federation said that it was important that information on straddling fish stocks being collected by coastal States be available to all other States. He also stressed the need for a specific provision on maintaining stocks within enclosed seas.