ENB:07:07
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
V. ENFORCEMENT OF HIGH SEAS FISHERIES, CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Australia said that applicable penalties should act as a deterrent. There should be observer programmes and landing control, inspection schemes, and satellite transmittal equipment. The US said that flag States and entities should agree on effective monitoring, control and surveillance and should apply adequate penalties to deter violations. High seas fishing vessels should be monitored by satellite to collect real time data. Poland stressed the need for flag States to address the issue of compliance and enforcement on a national level.
Norway said there is a need for the establishment of cooperation mechanisms as part of regional fishing arrangements or agreements to complement the responsibility of flag States. There may be some instances where, due to deficiencies, such mechanisms cannot be properly operated. We then need to incorporate rules to allow for coastal States' enforcement in such instances. Japan supported Poland's position regarding the responsibility of flag States to authorize their vessels on the high seas. On V(a)(ii), Japan supported mechanisms such as boarding and inspection, but had strong reservations with issues of arrest and detention.
Chile agreed with Australia on management measures, with the US on importance of regional organizations, and with Poland on the need for national legislative measures. The EC disagreed with Norway on how to ensure effective enforcement through coastal State jurisdiction. The basic principle is and should be that of flag State responsibility, whether or not the State is a contracting party. Non-parties are not exempt and should abstain from any activities likely to undermine the activity of the regional organization. In V(x), minimum standards should be applicable to all States. Argentina said all measures are to be based on the consent of the flag States and their consent is necessary for enforcement cases.
The Cook Islands supported the views of Papua New Guinea, Canada and others on transshipment. China said that conservation and management measures should result from consultation with regional organizations. Catch statistics and other data should be shared among all member States, flag States and coastal States. Iceland mentioned that A/CONF.164/L.11 contains a comprehensive system of enforcement. India supported Indonesia's suggestion to blacklist offending vessels and prohibit transshipment close to the EEZ and Japan's proposal on enforcement measures against non-members.
Kiribati stressed the importance of observer and inspection programmes. Tonga said that V(a)(xi) and 5(b) should mention the development of cooperative agreements, especially where coastal States lack the capacity to carry out investigations. Australia said that regional agreements on enforcement should supplement flag State jurisdiction. Papua New Guinea said that V(a)(ix) should also include research on non-fish species. Korea commented that satellite data transmission is a heavy economic burden.