Communication from the Commission - Community action plan for the eradication of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing
Date: 2002-05-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: authorised catch, conservation of fish stocks, fishery management, fishing controls, fishing regulations, fraud

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 28.5.2002
COM(2002) 180 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

Community action plan for the eradication of illegal,
unreported and unregulated fishing

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COMMUNICATION FROM THE Community action plan for the eradication of illegal,
unreported and unregulated fishing......................................................................................... 1

1.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

2.3.

2.4.

3.

3.1.

3.2.

3.3.

3.4.

3.5.

3.6.

4.

4.1.

4.2.

4.3.

4.4.

5.

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 3

MEASURES AT COMMUNITY LEVEL................................................................ 4

Action 1: State control over nationals ....................................................................... 4

Action 2: Defining procedures for the implementation of arrangements approved at
international level relating to the sustainability of fish stocks.................................... 4

Action 3: Control of activities associated with IUU fishing....................................... 5

Action 4: Alerting the fishing industry, consumers and the public in general to the
need to control IUU fishing ...................................................................................... 5

MEASURES AT THE LEVEL OF REGIONAL FISHERIES ORGANISATIONS .. 6

Action 5: Development of framework plans for control and inspection within each
regional fisheries organisation .................................................................................. 6

Action 6: Regulation of certain fishing activities on the high seas............................. 6

Action 7: Identification and monitoring of IUU vessels ............................................ 7

Action 8: Promoting uniform action plans to curb illegal fishing .............................. 7

Action 9: Identifying and quantifying illegal catches ................................................ 8

Action 10: Certificates and documents...................................................................... 8

MEASURES AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL......................................................... 9

Action 11: Improvement of information concerning fishing vessels .......................... 9

Action 12: Strengthening of international cooperation ............................................ 10

Action 13: Definition of a substantial link between a State and a vessel.................. 10

Action 14: Definition of rights and responsibilities of port States............................ 11

MEASURES IN PARTNERSHIP WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ............... 11

5.1.

Action 15: Assistance for developing countries to control unlawful fishing ............ 11

2

1.

INTRODUCTION

The control of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is one of the
international community's priorities for action to ensure the sustainability of fisheries
worldwide. The European Community has played an active role in drawing up the
international plan of action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and
unregulated fishing. The plan, which was prepared by the FAO Committee on
Fisheries (COFI) within the framework of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries, was endorsed by the FAO Council on 23 June 2001.

In accordance with the commitments it has given, the European Community must
now adopt the measures needed to implement the plan agreed at international level in
the Community.

As Community rules in this area/on this matter are already relatively developed, the
aim of this working paper is not to draw up a list of the resources available for
controlling IUU fishing. Instead, new measures or initiatives need to be identified
that should be undertaken under Community rules, in the context of regional fisheries
organisations, or by international multilateral organisations in order to achieve that
goal. The role the European Community can play in taking account of the specific
needs of developing countries should not be overlooked either.

The introduction of effective and coherent arrangements for monitoring fishing
activities is a key element in the success of a sustainable policy for the conservation
and management of fish stocks. The more restricting these conservation and
the greater the temptation to seek to evade them.
management measures are,
Fishermen and the various stakeholders involved will acknowledge their legitimacy
only if they feel that they are being applied fairly.

The phenomenon of "flags of convenience" represents in this respect a considerable
threat to the survival of fisheries worldwide. Their existence undermines the entire
monitoring system both in relation to the drawing up of rules and their application.
The European Community has a duty to act, therefore, in its own interest and in that
of the international community, to combat this phenomenon.

The reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP) is a particularly appropriate
framework in which to conduct a coherent debate on the matter. The timetable for the
reform should mean that the European Community will be able to present a model
document at the next session of the FAO's COFI in 2003.

3

2.

MEASURES AT COMMUNITY LEVEL

2.1.

Action 1: State control over nationals

–

–

Objective: to discourage Community Member State nationals from flagging
their fishing vessels under the jurisdiction of a State which is failing to fulfil its
flag State responsibilities and from committing infringements.

Justification: flags of convenience lead to unfair competition and present a
serious threat to the sustainability of fish stock management. In the absence of
international rules making it possible to establish a substantive link between a
State and vessels flying its flag, Community operators should be discouraged
from using these flags in order to ensure equal treatment between operators.
The European Community, moreover, has already given international legal
undertakings of
this nature (SEAFO Convention), which have to be
implemented in a non-discriminatory way at Community level.

– Means

(a) inserting a special article in the control Regulation defining the responsibilities of
Member States in relation to their nationals (shipowners or captains of fishing
vessels) engaging in fishing activities which are contrary to the rules for the
conservation and management of fish stocks on board a vessel flying the flag of a
non-member country.

(b) including in Community rules a ban on the use of a Community fishing
authorisation to charter vessels involved in IUU fishing.

2.2.

Action 2: Defining procedures for the implementation of arrangements
approved at international level relating to the sustainability of fish stocks

–

–

to give binding effect

instruments approved at
Objective:
international level for the (responsible and/or) sustainable management of fish
stocks, using for that purpose certain trade policy instruments.

to various

Justification: the inclusion, in Community rules, of procedures for excluding
protectionism together with the adoption of objective
implementation
conditions will allow equal treatment to be established between States.
The best known example is the United Nations resolution banning the use of
large driftnets, incorporated in the Community legal order but not observed by
some non-member countries.

– Means: adoption of Community rules compatible with the rules of the common
market organisation banning trade in fishery products taken in breach of
international agreements on responsible fishing and/or sustainable management
of fish stocks.

4

2.3.

Action 3: Control of activities associated with IUU fishing

–

–

importers,
transshippers, buyers, consumers,
Objective:
to ensure that
equipment suppliers, banks,
insurers and other service providers do not
maintain business relations which they might have with vessels identified as
engaging in IUU fishing.

Justification: if IUU vessels do not have outlets for disposing of products they
have obtained unlawfully, they will no longer have any financial interest in
engaging in this kind of fishing.

– Means: inserting a provision in the control Regulation under which the
conduct of such business or trade in fish or products derived from illegal,
unreported and unregulated fishing would constitute an infringement. To
facilitate the task of these parties, the Community should publish lists of IUU
vessels and, where appropriate, of operators directly associated with their
activities, as drawn up and approved by the regional fisheries organisations.

2.4.

Action 4: Alerting the fishing industry, consumers and the public in general to
the need to control IUU fishing

–

–

Objective: to ensure that the whole of the fishing industry together with
consumers and the public in general are aware of the detrimental effects of
IUU fishing on the conservation and responsible management of stocks and the
sustainability of fisheries worldwide, and on the efforts of the European Union,
both internally and internationally, to root out this scourge.

Justification: the Community has undertaken, within the framework of the
application of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and its
international plan of action against IUU fishing, to alert operators in the fishing
industry and other circles concerned to the need to control IUU fishing.
Implementation of the action plan will be more effective if it is backed by
public opinion.

– Means: Organisation of a number of information and public awareness
campaigns on the various aspects of the plan of action as and when it is
implemented. These will be conducted in different forms depending on the
aspect dealt with and the public targeted. They will include the dissemination
of information in printed, audiovisual and electronic form, including via special
Internet pages, press campaigns, communication and profile-raising measures,
and public events.

5

3.

3.1.

MEASURES
AT
ORGANISATIONS

THE

LEVEL

OF

REGIONAL

FISHERIES

Action 5: Development of framework plans for control and inspection within
each regional fisheries organisation

–

–

Objective: to secure the adoption by each regional fisheries organisation of a
framework plan for control and inspection, at sea and/or in port, and, where
appropriate, an observer plan tailored to the fishing characteristics of each one.

Justification: the effective implementation of conservation and management
measures adopted by the regional fisheries organisations requires appropriate
and consistent control and inspection arrangements. The entry into force of the
United Nations Agreement on Straddling Stocks implies, firstly, that the rules
contained in the Agreement should be tailored to the characteristics of the
fisheries covered by the different
fisheries organisations and,
secondly, that more precise and more operational rules than those contained in
the Agreement should be drawn up in order to ensure the more effective and
comprehensive guarantee of the rights of States and users based on transparent
and non-discriminatory procedures.

regional

– Means: The European Community will have to take the initiative in putting
forward outline plans for control and inspection which are as developed and
detailed as possible for all regional fisheries organisations which do not have
them and amendments to existing plans
to strengthen their
effectiveness in controlling IUU fishing.

in order

3.2.

Action 6: Regulation of certain fishing activities on the high seas

–

–

Objective: to secure the adoption by the regional fisheries organisations of
conservation and management measures, for fishing activities (e.g. a ban on the
use of driftnets), or for catches of species (e.g. deep-water species) which have
not been regulated at international level up to now.

Justification: The FAO plan of action covers not only unlawful fishing but
also unregulated fishing. Progress achieved in regulating and controlling
certain fishing activities runs the risk of fishing effort being transferred to
techniques which are not environment friendly or towards species which for
that reason will be rapidly overfished. The Community must at the same time,
in the interests of effectiveness and fairness, seek the uniform and non-
discriminatory application of the measures it requires its own fishermen to
observe both in Community waters and on the high seas. This lack of
internationally approved rules on the high seas threatens also to encourage the
development of fishing activities under flags of convenience as a way of
evading Community rules.

– Means: The European Community will have to take the initiative in putting
forward conservation and management measures for the high seas in order to
limit as far as possible the types of fishing which are unregulated at
international level. Priority will be given to cases where Community rules are
more stringent than existing international rules.

6

3.3.

Action 7: Identification and monitoring of IUU vessels

–

–

Objective: the identification by regional fisheries organisations of vessels
engaging in IUU activities
in accordance with transparent and non-
discriminatory procedures and criteria in order to impose sanctions on account
of those activities and, secondly, to allow action to be taken against flag States
to discourage those activities.

to identify them. Besides,

Justification: The number of vessels involved in IUU fishing is not properly
known. IUU vessels change flag, waters or owner frequently, making it
difficult
the criteria used by regional fisheries
organisations are not sufficiently clear and are the subject of dispute, which is
to the benefit of IUU vessels. In some cases, lists are drawn up on the basis of
information from a few States and are not verified before being adopted by the
legitimacy. The
regional
transparent. In
management procedures (enrolment, striking off) are not
addition, the consequences associated with listing are not spelled out. It is
crucial therefore to clarify the procedures and criteria for identifying IUU
activities
fisheries
organisations.

to achieve standardisation within regional

thus undermining their

fisheries organisations,

in order

– Means: The Community will

It will support

action, within regional

fisheries
take
organisations, to establish objective and transparent criteria for identifying IUU
the action taken by regional fisheries
fishing activities.
organisations to invite flag States to take action to eliminate IUU fishing
activities. It will encourage the regional fisheries organisations to exchange
information about vessels identified as such. The European Community will
seek ways of improving data collection on vessels, to support the action of the
regional fisheries organisations.

3.4.

Action 8: Promoting uniform action plans to curb illegal fishing

–

–

Objective: to introduce in a uniform and transparent way action plans to curb
illegal fishing in the regional fisheries organisations, in particular for species
targeted by IUU fishing activities.

Justification: Generally speaking, IUU fishing activities focus on species with
a high commercial value. Reducing IUU fishing for those species requires
targeted action and effective monitoring therefore. These plans need to be
transparent and non-discriminatory, however, since their ultimate goal is the
imposing of business sanctions. If the regional fisheries organisations adopt
uniform action plans covering the same target species, this will help prevent
the transfer of IUU fishing from one ocean to another.

– Means: The European Community will call upon the regional fisheries
organisations to adopt action plans to eradicate IUU fishing in accordance with
uniform, transparent and non-discriminatory procedures. Priority will be given
to species that are most heavily targeted by IUU fishing (those with a high
commercial value).

7

3.5.

Action 9: Identifying and quantifying illegal catches

–

–

Objective: to quantify through the regional fisheries organisations the volumes
taken by IUU vessels in order to assess the impact of these activities in the
context of stock evaluation.

Justification: in order to adopt management and conservation measures, stock
evaluation needs to be carried out properly, and this is very difficult for some
stocks as the scale of IUU catches is not fully known. In addition, if the control
of IUU activities is to be effective, it is important to identify and quantify
illegal catches so that action can then be taken against flag States.

– Means: The Community will encourage the regional fisheries organisations to
implement procedures for collecting data on quantities taken illegally
(information about
information about
trade, sampling organised at ports,
catches and landings) and identifying the origin of these catches so that action
can be taken against the flag States.

3.6.

Action 10: Certificates and documents

–

–

to

criteria,
the
Objective:
certification/documentation systems to support the effective implementation of
the action plan without excessive cost to operators.

common

basis

up,

set

on

of

the present

arrangements

Justification:
(ICCAT statistical document,
CCAMLR catch document), focusing on the collection of data which are used
primarily for future stock management, meets the needs of the action plan only
partly. Developed independently, they lack uniformity and make no distinction
between the respective responsibilities of operators and authorities. This latter
factor is a major drawback when applying an action plan which seeks to make
the various stakeholders more accountable and provides for the use of
sanctions.

Their practical design could encourage the forging of documents, a situation
that could become worrying with the extension of the systems to species other
than bluefin tuna and toothfish or their adoption by other regional fisheries
organisations.

The arrangements for the exchange of information about documents by
electronic or other means are legally and technically inadequate for satisfactory
verifications to be carried out, either immediately or later.

In order to meet the aims of the action plan, steps should be taken, on the basis
of a common framework:

–

to focus the content of documents once again on information concerning
vessels and their activities, which would be valuable for the management
of stocks and for verifying having regard to Article 3 of the action plan
defining IUU fishing;1

1 Community experience of certification and checks on origin may provide reference information about these

particular points.

8

–

–

–

to review their practical design in order to limit the risk of documents
being forged;1

to affirm the character of a mandatory declaration of documents and
confer on them legal effects that can be used for the action plan;

to put in place procedures for consulting documents electronically and
administrative cooperation arrangements giving the authorities technical
and legal means of exchanging information and carrying out all
necessary verifications.1

the

– Means: a Community initiative involving the regional fisheries organisations
reform of
concerned
and
certification/documentation systems and the preparation of a prototype
document for the meeting of FAO experts on the application of Article 76 of
the action plan.

States mainly

encourage

the

to

4.

MEASURES AT INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

4.1.

Action 11: Improvement of information concerning fishing vessels

–

–

to improve exchanges of

Objective:
fishing vessels
concerning their right to fish in order to identify as early as possible vessels
that have been struck off the register or whose authorisation to fish has been
cancelled.

information about

in order

Justification: under the Agreement to promote compliance by fishing vessels
on the high seas with international conservation and management measures
(FAO1993),
to engage in fishing activities on the high seas
authorisation must be granted by the flag State, and, secondly, a register must
be established of fishing vessels authorised to fly its flag and authorised to be
used for fishing on the high seas. In addition, certain information must be made
available to the FAO to strengthen international cooperation for the purposes of
identifying authorised fishing activities. The Community has already ratified
the FAO Agreement which has not yet entered into force because the number
of ratifications is insufficient. Many regional fisheries organisations have given
an undertaking to establish lists of authorised vessels or of vessels operating in
contravention in order to improve cooperation between contracting parties with
a view to improving the pursuit of and curbing unlawful fishing activities.
Access to a joint database administered by the FAO should improve exchanges
of information between regional fisheries organisations, and make the system
more effective. Since many countries (United States, Canada, Japan, Norway)
have already given an undertaking to cooperate with the FAO voluntarily, the
European Community cannot remain uninvolved.

9

– Means: the transmission to the FAO on a voluntary basis of information
concerning the Community fleet register pending the formal entry into force of
the 1993 FAO Agreement.

4.2.

Action 12: Strengthening of international cooperation

–

–

Objective: to strengthen international cooperation on monitoring, control and
surveillance by improving exchanges of
information between authorities
responsible for implementing measures to conserve and manage fish stocks.

Justification: fishing vessels, by definition, are mobile and move around on
the high seas in areas that are not directly under the jurisdiction of States. The
implementation of the United Nations Agreement on Straddling Stocks will
require closer coordination and cooperation between States in order
to
determine as quickly as possible the situation of vessels suspected of being in
contravention, having regard to the laws of its flag State.

– Means: Participation of the European Community and its Member States in the
network of monitoring agencies (MCS Network) proposed by Chile and the
United States.

4.3.

Action 13: Definition of a substantial link between a State and a vessel

–

–

Objective: to establish objective legal criteria for ensuring that an authorisation
to fly the flag of a State is based on the existence of a substantive link between
that State and the fishing vessel concerned, as required under Article 91 of
UNCLOS.

Justification:
the phenomenon of open registers which encourages the
proliferation of flags of convenience is particularly harmful to the sustainability
of fishing activities. The current legal vacuum means that some States are
allowing their flag to be flown by fishing vessels which enjoy freedom to fish
on the high seas without those States performing their duty to cooperate by
controlling the fishing activities of those vessels effectively. The adoption of
criteria for defining what is meant by a substantive link will mean that the
scope for dishonesty afforded by the lack of an international rule can be
excluded, and will make it possible for States which refuse, out of hand, to
engage in international cooperation to secure the sustainable conservation and
management of fish stocks to be identified objectively. This approach should
make it possible to emphasise the capacity of the flag State to exercise its
responsibilities effectively over fishing vessels flying its flag.

– Means: a Community diplomatic initiative to convene an international
conference to negotiate an international agreement determining conditions for
implementing Article 91 of UNCLOS for fishing vessels.

10

4.4.

Action 14: Definition of rights and responsibilities of port States

–

–

Objective: to define the rights and responsibilities of port States regarding
access for fishing vessels to port facilities in order to carry on business, transit
or first marketing operations, involving fishery products coming directly from
fishing grounds.

Justification: the rights and responsibilities of States on this matter are not
defined in any international convention. This legal vacuum encourages the
existence of ports of convenience just as flags of convenience exist. The
absence of international rules governing access to and controls at ports does not
foster the development of international cooperation in this area. It serves,
furthermore, as an alibi for countries which do not wish to be too rigorous to
avoid checking the origin of products that sustain their port operations.

– Means: a Community diplomatic initiative to convene an international
conference to negotiate an international agreement defining the rights and
responsibilities of port States concerning access by fishing vessels to port
facilities.

5.

MEASURES IN PARTNERSHIP WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

5.1.

Action 15: Assistance for developing countries to control unlawful fishing

–

–

Objective: to help developing countries comply in full with the undertakings
they are going to give under the international plan of action to prevent unlawful
fishing.

Justification: the formulation and implementation by developing countries of
policies for monitoring and controlling fishing activities at national and/or
regional
level represent a burden which many of them do not have the
resources to undertake. The European Community should contribute towards
their resources, especially where its vessels are engaged in fishing activities in
those countries under fisheries agreements.

– Means:

technical and financial assistance with monitoring, control and
surveillance of fishing activities should be put in place in partnership with the
developing countries on terms to be determined on a case by case basis.

11