Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Reports from Member States on behaviours which seriously infringed the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy in 2002
Date: 2003-12-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, common fisheries policy, exchange of information, fishing controls, fishing regulations, infringement of EU law

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 15.12.2003
COM(2003) 782 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Reports from Member States on behaviours which seriously infringed the rules of the
Common Fisheries Policy in 2002

EN

  EN

1.

INTRODUCTION

Council  Regulation  (EC)  N°  1447/19991  introduced  a  list  of  types  of  behaviour
which  seriously  infringe  the  rules  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy.  The  breaches
included  in  the  list  are  linked  to  the  most  important  obligations  imposed  by  the
Community  rules  on  stock  conservation,  monitoring  and  the  marketing  of  fisheries
products. Similar lists have been  adopted by Regional Fisheries  Organisations such
as NAFO. Because of  its seriousness,  such behaviours should attract  “proportional,
effective and dissuasive” penalties imposed by the national authorities.

In  view  to  ensure  transparency,  Member  States  are  requested  to  report  to  the
Commission of the action taken when breaches are detected. The assessment of this
information could enable a comparison between Member States as regards the action
initiated  against  the  operators  in  the  fishing  industry  who  may  have  committed  a
“serious  infringement”  as  well  as  the  effective  and  dissuasive  character  of  the
penalties eventually imposed. The legislator’s goal was to create a level playing field
among  the  fishermen  who  would  therefore  have  greater  confidence  in  the  control
authorities throughout the European Community and adhere to Community rules on
conservation of fisheries resources.

The procedure for reporting this data to the Commission is laid down in Commission
Regulation  (EC)  N°  2740/19992.  The  information  which  a  Member  State  has  to
transmit  to  the  Commission  for  each  “serious  infringement”  uncovered  by  the
national monitoring  authorities  and  having  been  the  subject  of  an  official  report,  is
the  nature  and  details  of  the  offence  (date,  zone/port,  flag/nationality),  the  type  of
proceeding  initiated  (administrative  –  criminal),  the  decisions  made  at  different
instances and the nature of the penalties imposed (amount of the fine – withdrawal of
fishing authorisation – seizure of catches or gears).

This Communication refers to data received from the Member States on the cases of
behaviours  which  seriously  infringed  the  rules  of  the  CFP  and  for  which  a
proceeding  has  been  opened  in  2002.  This  is  the  third  Communication  of  its  kind.
The  Commission  presented  the  relevant  data  for  2000  in  its  Communication  of
12 November 20013 and for 2001 in its Communication of 5 December 20024.
It is not in the present document that the Commission wishes to give its comments on
the  compliance  of  the  Member  States  to  the  CFP  rules  or  on  the  accuracy  of  the
reports on behaviours which seriously infringe the CFP rules submitted by Member
States.  It  reserves  to  do  so  in  the  forthcoming  “Report  on  the  monitoring  of  the
implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy”.

2.

REPORTS FROM MEMBER STATES FOR 2002

The  Member  States  were  required  to  send  to  the  Commission,  not  later  than
31 March  2003,  their  report  on  cases  discovered  in  2002.  In  order  to  allow  easier
processing  of  data,  this  transmission  should  be  made  by  electronic  means  and  in

1

2

3

4

OJ L 167, 02.07.1999, p. 5
OJ L 328, 22.12.1999, p. 62
COM(2001) 650, 12.11.2001
COM(2002) 687, 05.12.2002

2

 
                                                
conformity with the electronic format presented by the Commission at the meeting of
the Expert Group on Monitoring and Control on 21 February 2001 (working paper:
FIDES II Message Definition5).

Furthermore, in order to avoid certain technical problems which came to light during
the processing of data received from the Member States in the previous  years, with
the result that some reports could only be partially examined, a letter was sent to all
Member  States  on  6  March  2003  inviting  them  to  take  into  account  the  following
rules:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the data on infringements in respect of which proceedings were closed in 2002,
but initiated in 2000 or 2001, should be transmitted separately from the data on
infringements in respect of which proceedings were initiated in 2002;

where administrative or legal action is taken by a Member State other than the
Member State  which  detected  the  infringement,  it  is  the  former  which  must
indicate the infringement in its report;

the CIEM/ICES codes and, where not available (e.g. in the Mediterranean), the
FAO codes should be used in order to indicate the area where the infringement
was  committed.  If  the  infringement  took  place  in  territorial  waters,  it  is
sufficient to indicate "territorial waters". If the infringement was committed in
waters  falling  within  the  domain  of  a  regional  fishery  organisation,  reference
must be made to that organisation;

the  NUTS6  3  code  should  be  used  in  order  to  indicate  the  harbour  where  an
infringement has eventually been recorded;

where more than one infringement has been recorded with respect to the same
behaviour,  it  would  be  preferable  to  initiate  separate  proceedings  in  order  to
allow a more precise calculation of the average fine. If that is not possible for
practical or legal reasons, these cases should be referred to the Commission .

Moreover,  the  Member  States  were  invited  to  provide,  in  addition  to  what  is
requested  by  the  Commission  Regulation,  some  supplementary  information  which
will allow a more detailed analysis of the situation  in  the  Community. To this end,
the Member States were asked to indicate in a separate note:

– 

– 

– 

– 

the national provisions on the types of serious infringement listed in Regulation
(EC)  No 1447/99, with an  indication of the sanctions  provided  for  (including
the  range  of  the  fine  and  the  possibility  of  catches  and/or  gear  being
confiscated);

the legal value and legal basis of verbal and written warnings;

the total number of vessels inspected in 2002, at sea and in harbours;

the total number of undertakings and fish auction centres inspected in 2002;

5

6

FIDES: Fisheries Information Data Exchange System
NUTS: Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics

3

 
                                                
– 

– 

– 

the species most affected by infringements (using the FAO code);

the average duration of administrative and/or legal proceedings from the  time
when they are initiated until the end of the proceeding;

the  legislative  measures  adopted  or  proposed  in  2002  to  make  controls  more
effective.

Unfortunately,  the  great  majority  of  Member  States  neither  respected  the  deadline
laid  down  by  the  Community  legislation  nor  completely  followed  the  invitations
concerning  codes  (see  Annex  I  for  details).  Moreover,  only  Belgium,  Denmark,
France,  Portugal, 
the
supplementary  information  that  the  Commission  requested.  These  elements  are
mentioned in the chapter dedicated to each of these Member States.

the  United  Kingdom  and  partially  Spain  provided 

It is worth noting that the Commission has drawn up the annexed tables exclusively
on the basis of data provided by the Member States, in conformity with Regulation
(EC) N° 2740/99 and included in its comments, whenever possible, information that
could be acquired otherwise.

According to data submitted, the situation in each Member State can be summarised
as follows:

2.1.

BELGIUM

Belgium discovered and reported 49 cases of serious infringement covering 6 types
of  behaviour.  Twenty  four  cases  concerned  vessels  flying  the  Belgian  flag  or
involved  Belgian  fishermen;  for  19  cases,  the  flag  or  the  nationality  were  not
specified.  The  majority  (21  cases)  concerned  the  falsifying  of  data  required  in  the
control  documents  [E1].  Twelve  infringements  were  discovered  in  ports.  Criminal
proceedings  were  initiated  in  all  cases  and  penalties  imposed  in  31  cases.  The
average  fine  was  EUR 1  143,  concerning  in  fact  only  two  types  of  behaviour,  the
tampering with the VMS [E2], for which the fine was EUR 1 500 and the falsifying
of  the  data  required  in  the  control  documents  [E1]  for  which  the  average  fine  was
EUR 1 083. Belgium in addition ordered the seizure of  catches  or  gear in 10 cases
but no licence withdrawals were reported.

The Belgian legislation foresees various kinds of fines (from EUR 100 x 5 to EUR
100 000 x 5) and imprisonment (from 15 days to 5 years) to sanction an infringement
with respect to fisheries. This  penalty may be  doubled  where  there  are  aggravating
circumstances  (recurrence,  infringement  committed  at  night,  refusal  to  undergo  an
inspection).  Where  the  offence  is  detected  while  it  is  committed,  the  catches  and
gears may be confiscated and the vessel may be seized and detained.

Written warnings must specify the nature of the infringement and the period within
which the party concerned is to remedy the situation, and must state that, in the event
of a recurrence or failure to act upon the warning, an official report will be drawn up.
Oral warnings have the same value as any information and may be used to illustrate
the  obstinacy  of  the culprit.  They  may  be taken  into  account  by  the  court  handling
the matter when inflicting the sanction.

During  2002,  159  vessels  were  inspected  at  sea,  205  vessels  were  sighted  from  air
and 345 vessels were inspected at port.

4

 
Sole, plaice, cod, anglerfish, turbot and blue ling were the species more affected by
infringements in 2002.

When an infringement takes place, a criminal proceeding is conducted very swiftly.
Administrative proceedings are not foreseen.

No new legislative measure with respect to fisheries control was adopted in 2002.

2.2.

DENMARK

Denmark discovered and reported 442 serious infringements (415 concerning vessels
flying  the Danish  flag or  involving Danish fishermen, 26  concerning vessels  flying
the flag of other Member States or involving other Member States’ nationals and 1
from  a  third  country).  These  breaches  cover  15  types  of  behaviour.  The  two  main
types of infringement were the falsifying of  data required in the  control documents
[E1] (183 cases) and the use or holding on board of prohibited gear [D1] (95 cases).
339 infringements were discovered ashore. Administrative proceedings were initiated
in 215 cases, criminal proceedings in 128 cases and joint administrative and criminal
proceedings in 59 cases. Penalties were imposed in 319 cases. The average fine was
EUR 622 and ranged from EUR 3 354 for unauthorised fishing [D5] to EUR 393 for
the  falsifying  of  the  data  required  in  the  control  documents  [E1].  In  addition,
Denmark ordered the seizure of catches or gear in 34 cases and a licence withdrawal
in 111 cases, above all for the use or holding on board of prohibited  gear [D1] (82
cases).

In conformity with the Danish legislation, sanctions may be imposed in the form of
fines and of confiscation of illegal catches or illegally used fishing gear.

A caution is a fixed method for settling criminal cases and is issued by the police or
by  the  courts.  Danish  fisheries  control  can  issue  reprimands  (usually  oral)  or
recommendations. This form of settlement occurs in cases where the infringement of
a rule can be proven to be less significant or where the control authority deems a fine
to be disproportional to the offence. In such cases the caution is generally written.

In 2002, 809 inspections at sea  and 379 ashore were  carried  out.  3  439  inspections
were  carried  out  on  edible  fish  at  port  and  1  669  landings  of  fish  intended  for
industrial  processing  were  inspected.  A  total  number  of  2  347  inspections  of
enterprises and fish auctions were carried out.

No  statistics  of  species  of  fish  most  frequently  affected  by  infringements  are  made
available by the Danish authorities.

When licences are withdrawn under the administrative procedure, there is an average
delay for reaction of two or three days from the recording of the infringement to the
date of settlement. Where the licence holder opts for a court trial, it takes one to two
years, but this does not mean that the withdrawal is suspended.

In  2002,  the  rules  on  the  retention  of  foreign  vessels  (including  vessels  from  other
Member States) were made specific, and the possibility was introduced of penalising,
by  means  of  fines,  infringements  to  rules  concerning  fish  auctions  and  first-time
fishing  operations.  Moreover,  the  requirements  on  satellite  monitoring  of  fishing
vessels  were  tightened  up,  so  that  the  captain  of  a  fishing  vessel  must  suspend  his
fishing when it can be demonstrated that the equipment does not function, unload his

5

 
gear and sail to a given port in order to repair the equipment. As an exception to the
above,  the  vessel  may  be  allowed  to  finish  its  trip  when  the  vessel  activity  can  be
monitored otherwise as the captain accepts to submit a manual report on his position
at least every half hour.

2.3.

GERMANY

Germany  discovered  and  reported  118  serious  infringements  covering  8  types  of
behaviour. All cases concerned vessels flying the German flag or involved German
fishermen.  The  majority  (56)  concerned  the  falsifying  of  the  data  required  in  the
control  documents  [E1].  All  cases  were  subject  to  administrative  follow-up  and
penalties  were  imposed  to  101  cases.  The  average  fine  was  EUR 820  and  ranged
from  EUR  83  for  falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the
vessel  [C3]  to  EUR  3  962  for  fishing  without  holding  an  authorisation  [C1].  No
seizures or licence withdrawals were reported by Germany.

2.4.

GREECE

Greece  discovered  and  reported  1  021  serious  infringements  (1  018  concerning
vessels  flying  the  Greek  flag  or  involving  Greek  fishermen)  covering  10  types  of
behaviour. The majority (648 cases) concerned the use of prohibited fishing methods
[D2].  1  003  cases  were  subject  to  administrative  follow-up  and  18  cases  to  joint
administrative  and  criminal  proceeding.  In  1  012  cases,  Greece  imposed  penalties.
The average fine in 897 cases was EUR 678 and ranged from EUR 300 for fishing
using  falsified  documents  [C2],  for  falsifying  the  identification  marks  of  fishing
vessels [C3] and for directed fishing for, or keeping on board of, a prohibited species
[D4]  to  EUR  1  200  for  failure  to  stow  unauthorised  gear  [D3].  Greece  ordered
seizures of gear or catches in 980 cases and licence withdrawals in 560 cases (above
all, in both cases, for using prohibited fishing methods [D2]).

2.5.

SPAIN

Spain discovered and reported 1 785 serious infringements (1 295 concerning vessels
flying  the  Spanish  flag  or  involving  Spanish  fishermen,  185  concerning  vessels
flying the flag of other Member States or involved other Member States’ nationals,
34  from  a  third  country  and,  for  271  cases,  the  flag  or  the  nationality  are  not
specified) covering 13 types of behaviour. The two main types were fishing without
holding a licence or another authorisation [C1] (445 cases) and unauthorised fishing
[D5]  (375  cases).  780  infringements  were  discovered  at  ports.  Administrative
procedures were applied in 1 614 cases and a penalty was imposed in all these cases.
The  average  fine  was  EUR 2  126  ranging  from  EUR 105  628  for  failure  to  stow
unauthorised  gear  [D3]  to  EUR  545  for  fishing  using  falsified  documents  [C2].  In
addition, Spain ordered the seizure of catches or gear and the licence withdrawals in
all these cases.

The main penalty applied by Spain is the fine ranging from EUR 301 to EUR 60 000
for  serious  infringements  and  from  EUR  60  001  to  EUR  300  000  for  very  serious
infringements.  The  supplementary  penalties  applied  are, 
the  serious
infringements,  the  suspension  of  the  exercise  of  fishing  activities  for  a  period  not
exceeding  three  years,  the  seizure  of  fishing  gear  or  of  the  catches  and  the
suspension, withdrawal or non-renewal of authorisations for a period not exceeding
three  years;  for  the  very  serious  infringements,  the  suspension  of  the  exercise  of

for 

6

 
fishing activities for a period not exceeding five years, the seizure of fishing gear or
of  the  catches,  the  suspension,  withdrawal  or  non-renewal  of  authorisations  for  a
period not exceeding five years, the suspension from loans, grants and public aid for
a period not exceeding five years and the seizure of the vessel. These penalties may
be  imposed  only  following  an  administrative  act  culminating  in  an  administrative
resolution recording the penalty which is enforceable. The maximum duration of the
administrative procedure is six months.

2.6.

FRANCE

France  discovered  and  reported  288  serious  infringements  covering  14  types  of
behaviour  (222  concerned  vessels  flying  the  French  flag  or  involved  French
fishermen, 59 concerned vessels flying the flag of other Member States or involved
other Member States’ nationals and for 7 cases, the flag or the nationality  were not
specified). The majority (88) concerned the failure to observe the rules on minimum
sizes  [D6].  94  infringements  were  discovered  in  ports.  20  cases  were  subject  to
administrative follow-up and 203 to criminal proceeding. Penalties were imposed in
139 cases. The average fine was EUR 2 367 and ranged from EUR 206 for falsifying
the data required in the control documents [E1] to EUR 7 563 for using or holding on
board of prohibited gear [D1]. France also ordered the seizure of gear or catches in
84 cases and the licence withdrawal in only one case for failure to observe the rules
on minimum sizes [D6].

The  penal  procedure  may  entail,  when  provided  for  by  the  law,  the  seizure  of
obtained captures, of the gear or even of the vessel.

The written warning drawn up by the Public Prosecutor notes the failure to comply
with a rule, the gravity of which does not justify penal prosecution. A later repetition
of  the  offence  recorded  in  the  written  warning,  makes  it  possible  to  aggravate  the
sanction.

More than 2 200 vessels were inspected (on board) in waters under the jurisdiction or
sovereignty of  France by the maritime services, control bodies or other entities and
more  than  500  by  the  customs  services.  It  has  not  been  possible  to  quantify  the
number of vessels inspected by the national or departmental coastguards.

13 860 vessels were identified by aerial means.

Approximately 2 700 inspections were carried out during landing.

More than 33 500 inspections were carried out at the sales stage.

The  species  most  concerned  by  infringements  are:  hake,  plaice,  anglerfish,  cod,
scallops, mackerel.

The duration of the procedures varies according to their type, which can differ on the
grounds of whether the defendant is a French national or not .

At  the beginning  of  2003,  the  Directorate  of  Fisheries  and  Aquaculture  adopted  an
administrative  order  laying  down  rules  with  regard  to  the  control  of  the  mesh  size
and of the diameter of the wires of the fishing gear at sea.

7

 
2.7.

IRELAND

Ireland  discovered  and  reported  26  serious  infringements  covering  8  types  of
behaviour, the main one being falsifying data in control documents [E1] (13 cases).
20  cases  concerned  vessels  flying  the  Irish  flag  or  involved  Irish  fishermen  and  6
concerned vessels flying the flag of other Member States or involved other Member
States’ nationals. Criminal proceedings were initiated in 20 cases and penalties were
imposed  in  13.  The  average  fine  was  EUR 11  978  and  varied  widely  from
EUR 23 125  for  directed  fishing  for,  or  the  keeping  on  board  of,  an  unauthorised
species  [D4]  to  EUR 4  600  for  the  landing  of  products  not  complying  with  the
control rules [F1]. Ireland reported 7 cases of seizure of gear or catches but no cases
of withdrawal of a licence.

2.8.

ITALY

Italy  discovered  and  reported  1  074  serious  infringements  (2  concerning  vessels
where the flag country was not indicated) involving 14 types of behaviour. The two
main types were unauthorised fishing [D5] (479 cases) and fishing without holding a
licence or another authorisation [C1] (156 cases). 926 infringements were discovered
in ports. In 112 cases an administrative procedure was launched, in 7 cases criminal
proceedings  and  in  1  case  both  criminal  and  administrative  procedures.  Penalties
were  imposed  in  1 025  cases.  The  average  fine  in  791  cases  was  EUR 1 691  and
ranged from EUR 2 186 for unauthorised fishing [D5] to EUR 61 for falsifying of the
data required in the control documents [E1]. In addition, Italy ordered the seizure of
catches and gear in 611 cases, including 276 cases of unauthorised fishing [D5] and
105  of  using  or  holding  on  board  of  prohibited  gear  [D1].  No  licence  withdrawals
were reported.

2.9.

LUXEMBOURG

Luxembourg has neither fishing activities nor fisheries processing industry.

2.10.

THE NETHERLANDS

The Netherlands discovered and reported 122 serious infringements (101 concerning
vessels  flying  the  Dutch  flag  or  involving  Dutch  fishermen)  covering  7  types  of
behaviour.  The  majority  (49  cases)  concerned  the  falsifying  of  the  data  required  in
the  control  documents  [E1].  97  infringements  were  discovered  ashore.  122  cases
were subject to criminal proceeding. In 67 cases, The Netherlands imposed penalties.
The average fine in 33 cases was EUR 1 727, and ranged from EUR 310 for using
prohibited  fishing  methods  [D2]  to  EUR  5  590  for  using  or  holding  on  board  of
prohibited  gear  [D1].  50  seizures  of  gear  or  catches  were  reported  by  The
Netherlands. No licence withdrawals were reported.

2.11.

AUSTRIA

Austria reported no case of serious infringement.

2.12.

PORTUGAL

Portugal  discovered  and  reported  1  579  serious  infringements  (1  560  concerning
vessels flying the Portuguese flag or involving Portuguese fishermen, 17 concerning
vessels  flying  the  flag  of  other  Member  States  or  involved  other  Member  States’

8

 
nationals and 2 from a third country) covering 11 types of behaviour (for 5 cases, the
type is not specified). The two main types were fishing without holding a licence or
another  authorisation  [C1]  (420  cases)  and  unauthorised  fishing  [D5]  (357  cases).
Administrative  procedures  were  applied  in  1  437  cases  and  criminal  proceeding  in
only  3  cases.  The  number  of  penalties  imposed  totalled  550.  The  average  fine  was
EUR 491  ranging  from  EUR 139  for  falsifying  the  identification  marks  of  fishing
vessels  [C3]  to  EUR 1  232  failure  to  meet  marketing  standards  [F2].  In  addition,
Portugal ordered the seizure of catches or gear in 207 cases. No licence withdrawals
were reported.

The legal value of notices/warnings is in keeping with the twofold aim of prevention
and deterrence.

In 2002, 2 624 vessels were inspected at sea and 4 683 vessels were inspected at port;
880  inspections  at  fish  auction  centres  and  1  728  within  other  entities  (municipal
markets,  storage  depots,  retail  outlets,  supermarkets,  restaurants,  vehicles)  were
carried out.

Hake and horse mackerel were the species more affected by infringements in 2002.

An administrative proceeding needs on average 10 months to go through.

No new legislative measure in respect of fisheries control was adopted by Portugal in
2002.

2.13.

FINLAND

Finland  discovered  and  reported  2  serious  infringements,  both  concerning  vessels
flying  the  Finnish flag  or  involving  Finnish  fishermen  and  covering  only  1  type  of
behaviour, namely the falsifying of data required in the control documents [E1]. Both
infringements were discovered ashore. Administrative proceedings were initiated in
both  cases  but  a  penalty  was  imposed  in  only  1  case.  The  fine  was  EUR 420.  No
seizure or licence withdrawals were reported by Finland.

2.14.

SWEDEN

Sweden  discovered  and  reported  125  serious  infringements  (108  cases  concerning
vessels flying the Swedish flag or involving Swedish fishermen) covering 10 types of
behaviour.  The  two  main  types  were  fishing  without  holding  a  licence  or  other
authorisation  [C1]  (55  cases)  and  falsifying  of  the  data  required  in  the  control
documents  [E1]  (27  cases).  Criminal  proceedings  were  initiated  in  35  cases  and
penalties  imposed  in  6  cases.  The  average  fine  was  EUR 536  and  ranged  from
EUR 100 for unauthorised fishing [D5] to EUR 741 for falsifying the data required
in the control documents [E1]. No  seizure or licence withdrawals were  reported  by
Sweden.

2.15.

UNITED KINGDOM

United  Kingdom  discovered  and  reported  125  serious  infringements  without
specifying  the  flag  of  the  vessels  or  the  nationality  of  the  fishermen.  These  cases
covered 9 types of behaviour. The majority of cases (89) concerned the falsifying of
the data required in the control documents [E1]. Criminal proceedings were initiated
in 114 cases and administrative proceedings in 11 cases. Penalties were imposed in

9

 
all reported cases. The average fine was EUR 8 795 and ranged from EUR 1 999 for
using prohibited fishing methods [D2] to EUR 31 980 for tampering with the VMS
[E2]. No seizure or licence withdrawals were reported by the United Kingdom.

Verbal and written warnings can be given for minor transgressions. Written warnings
are also issued in respect of more serious transgressions where prosecution may not
be  in  the  public  interest  because  of  the  scale  of  the  offence  and  of  insufficient
evidence.

In 2002, the number of vessels inspected at sea was 2 426 and 9 980 at harbour. The
number of undertakings (processing factories, supermarkets and merchant premises)
and fish auction centres inspected was 2 772.

The  species  most  affected  by  serious  infringements  were:  cod,  haddock,  saithe,
whiting,  mackerel,  herring,  Norway  lobster,  anglerfish,  hake,  megrim,  plaice,
scallops and sole.

No details are available as regards to the duration of proceedings.

In 2002 a consultation took place with the fishery industry on a new scheme for the
registration of first sale fish traders. A further round of consultation is scheduled to
take place in 2003.

3.

SERIOUS INFRINGEMENTS COMPARED TO NUMBER OF FISHING VESSELS IN MEMBER
STATES

The following table indicates, for each Member State, the number of vessels included
in the Fishing Vessel Register on 1 January 2003 together with the total number of
serious breaches discovered and reported by the Member States. It is appropriate to
stress  that  all  cases  of  infringements  reported  do  not  necessarily  concern  fishing
vessels.

Member State

Number of vessels

Serious infringements

Belgium

Denmark

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Netherlands

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

United Kingdom

129

3726

2240

19523

14817

8082

1437

16069

952

10427

3544

1840

7556

10

49

442

118

1021

1785

288

26

1074

122

1579

2

125

125

 
4.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE REPORTS SUBMITTED BY THE MEMBER STATES

Member  States  reported  a  total  number  of  6  756  cases  of  serious  infringements
covering  all  types  of  breaches  included  in  the  list  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  N°
1447/1999. The number of the breaches detected is thus less than in the previous two
years (7 298 in 2000 and 8 139 in 2001).

As  in  previous  years,  almost  half  of  the  reported  cases  concerns  unlawful  fishing
either without authorisation [C1] or in prohibited areas [D5]. By order of importance,
a considerable number of infringements was reported as regards the use of prohibited
fishing methods [D2] and the falsifying of the data required in the control documents
[E1].  On  the  other  hand,  very  few  cases  were  reported  as  regards  obstructing  the
work of observers [B1], falsifying, destroying or tampering with evidence [A2] and
failure to comply with the rules relating to transhipment [D7].

The  great  number  of  breaches  was  done  by  the  national  vessels  of  the  reporting
Member State. Only 5% of cases concerned vessels of a Member State other than the
reporting one and less than 1% concerned third countries’ vessels.

2 250 infringements were discovered at ports and mostly in Spain and Italy.

In  terms  of  procedure,  in  the  majority  of  cases  an  administrative  procedure  was
launched.  Belgium,  Ireland,  The  Netherlands  and  Sweden  exclusively  applied  a
criminal proceeding whenever an infringement was discovered.

74% of infringement procedures were concluded with the application of a penalty. In
Greece and the United Kingdom, respectively 99% and 100% of infringements were
sanctioned; on the other hand, in Sweden, only 5% of infringements were sanctioned.
It cannot be excluded that these figures include to a certain extent procedures which
were initiated during previous years but not finalised until 2002.

When  comparing  fines  imposed  on  fishermen,  there  are  still  striking  differences
between Member States. For the same type of infringement, the level of fine varies
from one Member State to another.

For example,

(cid:1)  for fishing without holding a licence or other authorisation [C1], the average fine

was EUR 384 in Greece and EUR 21 400 in Ireland;

(cid:1)  for unauthorised fishing [D5], the average fine was EUR 100 in Sweden and EUR

3 354 in Denmark;

(cid:1)  for  falsifying  data  required  in  the  control  documents  [E1],  the  average  fine  was

EUR 61 in Italy and EUR 9 148 in the United Kingdom.

In  general,  the  average  fine  applied  in  Finland  was  EUR  420  and  in  Ireland  EUR
11 978. The average fine allows to calculate the amount paid by the fishery industry
of  each  Member  State  as  a  consequence  of  a  serious  breach  (see  Annex  X).  It  is
worth  noting  here  that  Regulation  (EC)  N°  1447/99  does  not  indicate  any  ranking
between the 19 types of breaches as regards to their gravity.

11

 
The  average  fine imposed  in the  proceedings  that ended with  a  penalty  amounts  to
1 757  €  which  is  close  to  the  amount  of  the  previous  year.  Furthermore,  in  3  597
cases the seizure of catches or gears was ordered. Greece, Spain and  Italy were the
Member States which reported to have applied this measure in a significant number
of  cases.  On  the  other  hand,  Germany,  Finland,  Sweden  and  the  United  Kingdom
reported no seizure of catches or gears.

As regards licence withdrawals, it appears that Greece, Spain and to a lesser extent
Denmark systematically applied this type of penalty. In total, 2 286 cases of serious
infringements were sanctioned with licence withdrawals.

It is apparent that both the seizure of catches/gears and withdrawal of licences have a
significant economic impact on the fishing enterprises. It is therefore unfortunate that
for the time being it is not possible to establish a precise evaluation.

With  regard  to  the  number  of  vessels  included  in  the  Fishing  Vessel  Register  on
1 January 2003 (90 342) and the number of infringements for which penalties were
imposed (5 003), it entails that procedures were launched in respect of 5,5% of the
fleet.  This  percentage  is  actually  somewhat  smaller  since  some  procedures  which
cannot be numbered, refer to on-shore operators.

5.

GENERAL COMMENTS ON FINDINGS

The  Commission’s  services  are  undergoing  a  survey  on  the  sanctions  provided  by
national legal systems with regard to fishing activities. The following comments are
essentially based upon their findings which are, at this point in time, definitive.

Social and economical factors like the value of the catches landed and the dissimilar
standards  of  living  of  the  fishermen  within  and  between  Member  States,  are  often
used to justify the difference in the level of fines imposed by the different Member
States and between their different authorities. The fact that the procedure followed by
the  authorities  is  a  criminal  or  an  administrative  one,  does  not  seem  to  have  a
significant impact on the level of the fines. On the other hand, it can be said that the
judiciary, and to a considerable extent the prosecuting authorities, are not sufficiently
aware  or  sensitive  to  the  seriousness  of  fisheries  offences.  With  heavy  case  loads,
prosecutors  and  courts  are  unlikely  to  give  priority  to  these  cases,  which  results  in
lower penalties and longer handling times. Where good results have been achieved,
and where there is good co-operation between authorities, it is invariably due to hard
work  and  dedication,  not  least  on  the  part  of  the  inspection  and  investigation
authorities.

Moreover,  some  Member  States  tend  not  to  include  the  economic  benefit  from  the
infringement as a criteria for the determination of the level of the fine. The economic
situation of the offender generally appears to be a much more important factor. In a
number  of  Member  States  there  are  possibilities  to  proceed  with  sanctioning  in  a
simplified way, either through compounding (normally through the intervention of a
prosecutor),  through  payment  order  issued  by  the  police/inspection  authorities  or
through  voluntary  payment.  While  these  simplified  procedures  can  improve  the
speed of the process, the fines often do not act as a deterrent.

12

 
It must be noted that the seizure of catches or gears is still not generally applied, in
spite  of  the  fact  that  these  kinds  of  sanctions  may  be  more  effective.  The  lack  of
confiscation/forfeiture  in  combination  with  a  fine  that  does  not  even  match  the
economic benefit will  have as a  result that  the  sanctions  imposed  lack  all  deterrent
value. However, in some Member States there is confiscation of both catch and gear,
which in combination with the fine will result in very severe penalties.

As regards the possibility to withdraw fishing authorisations, although most Member
States already have the legal basis for withdrawing licenses, only three of them apply
it (Denmark, Greece, Spain). There seems  to  be  a  general  resistance to this type of
measure, often with reference to human rights issues (the right to make a living), the
complex and lengthy procedures involved and the severity of the measure.

The  large  use  of  written  or  even  oral  warnings,  is  a  matter  of  concern  since  their
purpose is vague, they are not always recorded and are of little help in the action to
discourage infringements.

In  some  cases,  there  are  indications  which  suggest  that  the  Member  States  have  a
tendency  to  be  more  severe  with  foreign  vessels  and  national  vessels  with  foreign
owners.

6.

FINAL REMARKS

As  for  the  previous  Communications  on  the  breaches  which  seriously  infringe  the
rules  of  the  CFP,  it  must  be  noted  that  information  gathered  is  of  no  easy
interpretation  since  it  exclusively  consists  of  sets  of  figures.  When  the  Member
States  do  not  provide  the  Commission’s  services  with  more  detailed  information
which can shed some light on the figures, it is hard to correctly assess the situation.

Moreover,  there  are  indications  that  the  data  submitted  to  the  Commission  in  the
context of serious infringements are flawed. In some cases it appears that the number
of  infringements  reported  may  include  recreational  fishery  and  other  fishing
activities that are not covered  by the Common Fisheries Policy. As for the  average
fines, there are cases where the reported levels probably include confiscation values,
which should have been reported separately. There are also indications that there are
instances where the outcome of a case goes unreported because the finalisation of the
case does not intervene in the same year as the detection of the infringement.

Moreover the accuracy of data collected varies greatly even within the same Member
State.  For  instance,  this  could  be  the  case  when  the  responsibilities  are  highly
decentralised  or  when  responsibilities  are  split  between  different  authorities  with
different  organisational  structures.  There  also  seems  to  be  a  general  problem  with
feedback  regarding  the  outcome  of  cases,  especially  from  the  judiciary,  which  can
lead to reduced reliability of the statistics.

Furthermore,  since  the  Member  States  do  not  always  use  the  right  codes  to  the
infringement  or  do  not  fill  correctly  the  form  provided  for  in  Annex  I  of  the
Regulation  (EC)  N°  2740/99,  the  set  of  data  transmitted  cannot  be  fully  exploited.
The Commission therefore insists on the need to adhere to the requirements.

13

 
Bearing  in  mind  all  these  shortcomings,  the  Commission  underlines,  as  a  general
remark, that the level of sanctions as it appears from the tables annexed to the present
Communication,  is  not  yet  satisfactory  since  sanctions  do  not  seem  to  have  a
dissuasive effect. To prove it, it will be sufficient to compare the amounts paid by the
fisheries industry as a consequence of a sanction (see Annex X) to the landing value :
it is roughly one thousandth of the 2001 landing value. The decrease of the number
of proceedings opened for breaches of CFP rules in comparison with previous years
is also a matter of concern and justification shall be sought.

The  Council  restated  last  December,  when  adopting  Regulation  n°2371/2002,  its
commitment  to  act  against  those  responsible  of  serious  infringements  by  imposing
sanctions  proportionate  to  the  seriousness  of  such  infringements  hence  effectively
discouraging to continue to breach the rules. The present report shows that more has
to be done in order to put the political will into acts.

In order to comply with the Community rules, each Member State must ensure that
its penalties shall be deterrent. Furthermore, Member States must apply or extend the
application  of  other  measures  like  the  seizure  of  catches  and  gears  and  the
withdrawal  of  the  fishing  authorisations.  The  Commission  also  recommends
initiatives  aimed  at  enhancing  awareness  of  judges  and  public  prosecutors  on  the
need to effectively pursue illegal fishing in order to obtain compliance with the rules
designed  for  the  exploitation  of  marine  resources.  To  this  end,  the  Commission  is
ready  to  assist  the  Member  States  in  adopting  measures  designed  to  achieve  these
objectives.

Finally,  as  it  is  laid  down  in  Article  25(4)  of  the  Regulation  n°2371/2002,  the
Commission will propose in due time to the Council a catalogue of sanctions relating
to  serious  infringements  of  CFP  rules.  The  catalogue  is  designed  to  promote
compliance with these rules through dovetailed sanctions which shall be applied with
similar  severity  throughout  the  Community.  This  will  undoubtedly  help  national
authorities  to  dispel  misgivings  among  its  fishermen,  create  the  level  playing  field
which  is a condition for  the  deployment  of  a fair fishing activity  and  thus  promote
more respectful behaviours as regards to the CFP rules.

14

 
LIST OF TABLES

(cid:1)  information transmission dates (Annex I);

(cid:1)  number of cases discovered by type of behaviour and by Member State (Annex II);

(cid:1)  number of cases discovered by nationality of the party which committed the infringement

and by Member State (Annex III);

(cid:1)  type of procedure initiated by type of behaviour and by Member State (Annex IV);

(cid:1)  number of cases where penalties were imposed by type of behaviour and by Member State

(Annex V);

(cid:1)  average fine by type of behaviour and by Member State (Annex VI);

(cid:1)  number of seizures by type of behaviour and by Member State (Annex VII);

(cid:1)  number of licence withdrawals by type of behaviour and by Member State (Annex VIII);

(cid:1)  number  of  cases  discovered  at  ports  by  type  of  behaviour  and  by  Member  State

(Annex IX);

(cid:1)  amount  paid  by  the  fishery  industry  in  each  Member  State  as  a  consequence  of  serious

infringements (Annex X).

15

 
ANNEX I

Member State

First Reception
(Deadline : 31 March 2002)

Date of final successful
submission to Fides

Belgium

20 March 2003

20 March 2003 (by Belgium)

Denmark

Germany

19 April 2003

19 April 2003 (by Denmark)

24 March 2003

24 March 2003 (by Germany)

Comments

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

Greece

15 April 2003

28 May 2003 (by EC)

By mail in EXCEL format

31 March 2003

02 June 2003 (by Spain)

06 May 2003

06 May 2003 (by France)

NUTS codes not used for ports

Problems with greek characters

By  electronic  mail  in  EXCEL
format

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

NUTS codes not used for ports

26 May 2003

28 May 2003 (by EC)

By mail in EXCEL format

27 May 2003

10 July 2003 (by EC)

06 May 2003

06 May 2003 (by Netherlands)

27 March 2003

24 April 2003

22 June 2003 (by EC)

01 April 2003

01 April 2003 (by Finland)

28 March 2003

28 March 2003 (by Sweden)

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  mail  in  MSWord
format

ICES/FAO codes not used

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  mail  in  EXCEL
format

ICES/FAO codes not used

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES

NUTS codes not used for ports

By  electronic  transmission  –
FIDES
NUTS codes not used for ports

United Kingdom

01 April 2003

01  April  2003 
Kingdom)

(by  United

16

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Austria

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

 
Code  Type de Comportement

BEL

 DNK

 DEU

 GRC

 ESP

 FRA

 IRL ITA

 LUX

 NLD

 AUT PRT

 FIN

 SWE

 GBR

TOTAL

NUMBER OF SERIOUS INFRINGEMENTS BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

ANNEX II

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

 2

3 3

1 1

36

15

1

1

5

4

 1

C1

Fishing  without  holding  a  fishing  licence,  a  fishing  permit  or  any  other
authorisation required for fishing

1

12

 21

138

 445

7

 3

 156

 420

 55

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the  fishing
vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed  fishing  for,  or  keeping  on  board  of,  a  species  subject  to  a
prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure to comply with the rules and procedures relating to transhipments

8

7

9

1

 95

4

33

13

69

3

 6

 3

32

 28

1

 1

6

3

 16

18

 1

 143

648

 122

1

 1

2

 3

154

375

16

52

61

3

4

26

21

88

31

 5

24

479

84

2

3

2

 8

6

2

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

21

183

56

344

37

13

1

17

 21

 217

 66

3

357

135

1

8

13

 6

2

9

2

4

35

2

27

89

15

 10

4

31

2

49

64

1 %

3

0 %

2

0 %

1258

19 %

42

1 %

70

1 %

529

8 %

887

13 %

12

0 %

115

2 %

1432

21 %

540

8 %

2

0 %

857

13 %

 
E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

33

22

94

1

38

4

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on  remote
transmission of fishing vessel movements

Failure of the master of the fishing vessel of a third country to comply with
the applicable control rules when operating in Community waters

Landing of  fishery  products not  complying  with  the  Community  rules  on
control and enforcement

7

2

7

E3

E4

F1

F2

Storing, processing, placing  on  sale  and transporting  fishery  products not
meeting the marketing standards in force

15

15

23

136

227

6

2

11

NA

Unspecified

Total for Member State::

1

120

199

5

6

3

6

6

3

1

107

2 %

60

1 %

6

0 %

376

6 %

389

6 %

5

0 %

49

1 %

 442

7 %

 118

2 %

 1021

1785

 288

 26

 1074

15 %

26 %

4 %

01 %

16 %

 122

2 %

 1579

23 %

2

0 %

 125

2 %

 125

2 %

 6756

18

 
ANNEX III

INFRINGEMENTS BY COUNTRY AND BY NATIONALITY IN 2002

National

 Unspecified

 Third country  EU

TOTAL

6

26

3

185

59

6

21

17

6

1

34

2

10

49

442

118

1021

1785

288

26

1074

122

1579

2

125

125

47

329

6756

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

24

415

118

1018

1295

222

20

1072

101101

1560

2

108

5955

19

271

77

2

1

125

425

19

 
TYPE OF PROCEDURE INITIATED (*) BY TYPE OF SERIOUS INFRINGEMENT AND BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

ANNEX IV

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

Sum:

A1 Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2 Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1 Obstructing the work of observers

C1 Fishing  without  holding  a  fishing  licence,  a  fishing  permit  or  any  other

authorisation required for fishing

C2 Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3 Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the  fishing

vessel

D1 Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2 Using prohibited fishing methods

D3 Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4 Directed  fishing  for,  or  keeping  on  board  of,  a  species  subject  to  a

prohibition of fishing

D5 Unauthorised fishing

D6 Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7 Failure to comply with the rules and procedures relating to transhipments

E1 Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

E2 Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

0 A
1 P
0A&P
1 A
2 P
0A&P
0 A
1 P
0A&P
4 A
8 P
0A&P
0 A
0
1A&P

 47 A
8 P
40A&P
0 A
3 P
0A&P

20 A
6 P
2A&P
 3 A
7 P
3A&P
17 A
44 P
2A&P

0 A
1 P
0A&P

0 A
8 P
0A&P
0 A
7 P
0A&P

0 A
9 P
0A&P

0 A
21 P
0A&P
 0 A
3 P
0A&P

 123 A
45 P
13A&P
0 A
2 P
0A&P

1 A
0 P
0A&P
4A
0 P
0A&P
6 A
0 P
0A&P
 1 A
0 P
0A&P
 20 A
0 P
0A&P
 4 A
0 P
0A&P

 3 A
1 P
0A&P
54 A
3 P
0A&P
 3 A
0 P
1A&P

36 A
0 P
0A&P

2 A
12 P
0A&P

0 A
1 P
0A&P

138 A
0 P
0A&P
3 A
0 P
0A&P
6 A
0 P
0A&P
 3 A
0 P
0A&P
630 A
0 P
18A&P
1 A
0 P
0A&P
1 A
0 P
0A&P
 154 A
0 P
0A&P
 52 A
0 P
0A&P

445 A
0 P
0A&P
32 A
0 P
0A&P
28 A
0 P
0A&P
 16 A
0 P
0A&P
122 A
0 P
0A&P
 2 A
0 P
0A&P
 3 A
0 P
0A&P
 373 A
0 P
0A&P
 61 A
0 P
0A&P

 0 A
6 P
0A&P

 0 A
3 P
0A&P

0 A
1 P
0A&P
 0 A
1 P
0A&P

 0 A
2 P
0A&P
0 A
3 P
0A&P

0 A
1 P
0A&P
 0 A
17 P
0A&P
 0 A
3 P
0A&P
2 A
2 P
0A&P
4 A
21 P
0A&P
 1 A
20 P
0A&P
 4 A
66 P
0A&P

 0 A
13 P
0A&P

 344 A
0 P
0A&P
 94 A
0 P
0A&P

 2 A
27 P
0A&P
0 A
1 P
0A&P

 21 A
0 P
0A&P

2 A
0 P
0A&P
 8 A
0 P
0A&P

 6 A
0 P
0A&P
 2 A
0 P
0A&P
 16 A
0 P
0A&P

 56 A
0 P
0A&P

20

0 A
4 P
0A&P

 0 A
6 P
0A&P
 0 A
2 P
0A&P

 0 A
9 P
0A&P
 1 A
1 P
0A&P
 0 A
4 P
0A&P

 10 A
79 P
0A&P
 0 A
6 P
0A&P

0 A
2 P
0A&P

 0 A
3 P
0A&P
 0 A
5 P
0A&P

2 A
0 P
0A&P

 0 A
20 P
0A&P

416 A
0 P
0A&P

21 A
0 P
0A&P
 216 A
0 P
0A&P
66 A
0 P
0A&P

3 A
0 P
0A&P
 357 A
0 P
0A&P
 134 A
1 P
0A&P

 35 A
0 P
0A&P
1 A
0 P
0A&P

 38 A
18 P
0A&P
 1 A
2 P
0A&P
 1 A
1 P
0A&P
1028 A
20 P
0A&P
41 A
0 P
1A&P
 58 A
10 P
0A&P
310 A
54 P
40A&P
 822 A
18 P
18A&P
 5 A
2 P
0A&P
 40 A
42 P
2A&P
 945 A
52 P
3A&P
287 A
146 P
3A&P
 0 A
2 P
0A&P
572 A
254 P
13A&P
 95 A
12 P
0A&P

0 A
15 P
0A&P
 0 A
10 P
0A&P

 0 A
4 P
0A&P
 0 A
31 P
0A&P
0 A
2 P
0A&P
 0 A
49 P
0A&P

 
E3 Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on  remote

transmission of fishing vessel movements

E4  Failure  of  the  master  of  the  fishing  vessel  of  a  third  country  to  comply
with the applicable control rules when operating in Community waters

F1 Landing of fishery products not complying with the Community rules on

control and enforcement

F2 Storing, processing, placing on sale and transporting fishery products not

meeting the marketing standards in force

NA Unspecified

2 A
0 P
0A&P

7 A
0 P
0A&P

 4 A
20 P
0A&P

3 A
4 P
0A&P
7 A
8 P
0A&P

 227 A
0 P
0A&P

0 A
2 P
0A&P

 15 A
0 P
0A&P

 1 A
7 P
0A&P

 17 A
3 P
0A&P

 0 A
11 P
0A&P

 Sum:

 0 A
49 P
0A&P

215 A
128 P
59A&P

118 A
0 P
0A&P

 1003 A
0 P
18A&P

1614 A
0 P
0A&P

20 A
203 P
0A&P

 0 A
20 P
0A&P

112 A
7 P
1A&P

0 A
122 P
0A&P

0 A
3 P
0A&P

 0 A
3 P
0A&P
0 A
2 P
0A&P

 120 A
0 P
0A&P
198 A
1 P
0A&P
4 A
1 P
0A&P
 1437 A
3 P
0A&P

2 A
0 P
0A&P

 0 A
35 P
0A&P

 11 A
114 P
0A&P

 13 A
26 P
0A&P
 0 A
2 P
0A&P
 350 A
17 P
0A&P
 238 A
19 P
0A&P
4 A
1 P
0A&P
4532 A
681 P
78A&P

(*)

A =
P =
A & P = Administrative+criminal

Administrative
Criminal

21

 
NUMBER OF CASES WHERE PENALTIES WERE IMPOSED AND NUMBER OF INFRINGEMENTS BY TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR AND BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

Sum:

ANNEX V

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

C1

Fishing  without  holding  a  fishing  licence,  a  fishing  permit  or  any  other
authorisation required for fishing

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the  fishing
vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed  fishing  for,  or  keeping  on  board  of,  a  species  subject  to  a
prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure to comply with the rules and procedures relating to transhipments

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

E3

E4

F1

F2

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on  remote
transmission of fishing vessel movements

Failure  of  the  master  of  the  fishing  vessel  of  a  third  country  to  comply
with the applicable control rules when operating in Community waters

Landing of fishery products not complying with the Community rules on
control and enforcement

Storing, processing, placing on sale and transporting fishery products not
meeting the marketing standards in force

 1
(1)

8
(8)

7
(7)

1
(9)

13
(21)

1
(3)

36
(36)

0
(15)

1
(1)

1
(1)

1
(1)

12
(21)

 138
(138)

445
(445)

3
(7)

2
(3)

 155
(156)

3
(3)

 6
(6)

3
(3)

32
(32)

28
(28)

16
(16)

642
(648)

122
(122)

2
(2)

3
(3)

 373
(375)

 61
(61)

 344
(344)

94
(94)

227
(227)

 1
(1)

1
(1)

 153
(154)

 50
(52)

 15
(15)

0
(1)

 1
(1)

2
(2)

0
(3)

 10
(13)

2
(2)

 6
(6)

3
(3)

142
(143)

31
(31)

 5
(5)

 23
(24)

461
(479)

79
(84)

 1
(1)

3
(4)

128
(136)

0
(1)

16
(18)

2
(3)

1
(4)

 6
(26)

13
(21)

66
(88)

 8
(37)

0
(1)

4
(38)

5
(6)

15
(23)

7
(15)

10
(10)

 1
(4)

27
(31)

 0
(2)

 17
(49)

5
(11)

1
(2)

 0
(3)

1
(1)

8
(12)

0
(1)

90
(95)

2
(4)

26
(33)

 9
(13)

42
(69)

1
(2)

6
(8)

 5
(6)

2
(2)

 13
(16)

 144
(183)

 55
(56)

 0
(2)

2
(2)

4
(7)

9
(15)

7
(7)

22

0
(5)

4
(4)

43
(64) – 67%

0
(55)

0
(1)

 0
(8)

 1
(13)

0
(3) – 0%

2
(2) – 100%

971
(1258) – 77%

41
(42) – 98%

54
(70) – 77%

447
(529) – 84%

860
(887) – 97%

9
(12) – 75%

77
(115) – 67%

1215
(1432) – 85%

363
(540) – 67%

0
(2) – 0%

 6
(6)

 2
(2)

 9
(9)

2
(2)

 4
(4)

1
(2)

4
(27)

89
(89)

693
(857) – 81%

 6
(6)

3
(3)

101
(107) – 94%

19
(60) – 32%

1
(6) – 17%

250
(376) – 66%

170
(389) – 44%

 0
(6)

1
(6)

0
(3)

0
(1)

 207
(420)

 8
(21)

153
(217)

 49
(66)

2
(3)

199
(357)

 21
(135)

 7
(35)

0
(1)

 7
(120)

3
(199)

 
NA

Unspecified

* 

in brackets, the number of cases discovered

Sum:

31
(49)

63%

319
(442)
72%

 101
(118)
86%

 1012
(1021)
99%

1614
(1785)
90%

139
(288)
48%

13
(26)
50%

1025
(1074)
95%

67
(122)
55%

3
(5)

 550
(1579)
35%

1
(2)
50%

 6
(125)
5%

125
(125)
5%

3
(5) – 60%

 5003
(6756)
74%

23

 
AVERAGE FINE AND NUMBER OF INFRINGEMENTS BY TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR AND BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

ANNEX VI

Code  Type of behaviour

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

TOTAL

5079
(36)

12800
(1)

206
(1)

3384
(3)

4924
(42)

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

C1

Fishing  without  holding  a  fishing  licence,  a  fishing  permit  or  any  other
authorisation required for fishing

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the  fishing
vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed  fishing  for,  or  keeping  on  board  of,  a  species  subject  to  a
prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure to comply with the rules and procedures relating to transhipments

805
(1)

671
(1)

568
(3)

447
(3)

1342
(1)

1565
(3)

3354
(3)

793
(27)

 68
(1)

2000
(1)

21400
(2)

 2052
(143)

 185
(6)

68
(3)

1066
(130)

1026
(27)

 1395
(4)

 1033
(5)

 2186
(323)

1018
(41)

7563
(8)

 20000
(1)

 23125
(2)

1875
(2)

2000
(6)

 792
(16)

 206
(4)

 8455
(10)

61
(1)

5590
(5)

310
(2)

738
(8)

1511
(14)

3962
(12)

 384
(125)

83
(1)

1247
(6)

300
(3)

 300
(3)

 933
(3)

632
(575)

1463
(445)

545
(32)

1282
(28)

2660
(16)

3025
(122)

 1200
(1)

 105628
(2)

200
(5)

 300
(1)

1423
(2)

 1111
(135)

 1290
(13)

744
(37)

1334
(3)

2014
(375)

1956
(61)

 2275
(344)

1212
(94)

 435
(143)

 139
(6)

 580
(53)

 1157
(6)

 253
(2)

 394
(86)

 690
(19)

 100
(1)

 809
(6)

420
(1)

 741
(4)

155
(1)

370
(2)

1314
(874)

474
(41)

924
(41)

1518
(231)

1052
(735)

31148
(7)

2719
(31)

1796
(933)

1201
(226)

2813
(604)

3043
(101)

907
(12)

155
(1)

 3145
(6)

 1999
(2)

2328
(8)

 2518
(2)

 3238
(4)

 9148
(83)

 31980
(6)

2745
(3)

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

393
(76)

 102
(55)

1083
(6)

 1500
(1)

E3

E4

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on  remote
transmission of fishing vessel movements

216
(7)

568
(2)

Failure of the master of the fishing vessel of a third country to comply with
the applicable control rules when operating in Community waters

24

 
F1

F2

Landing of  fishery  products not  complying  with  the  Community  rules  on
control and enforcement

Storing, processing, placing  on  sale  and transporting  fishery  products not
meeting the marketing standards in force

1610
(1)

787
(3)

2245
(227)

4600
(2)

 343
(4)

 892
(14)

288
(2)

1119
(104)

NA

Unspecified

* in brackets, the number of cases where a fine was imposed

 Average for Member State

 1143
(7)

 622
(122)

820
(101)

678
(897)

2126
(1785)

2367
(39)

 11978
(18)

1691
(791)

1727
(33)

 757
(7)

 1232
(3)

667
(3)

491
(334)

420
(1)

 536
(6)

8795
(117)

2187
(241)

1075
(126)

667
(3)

 1757
(4251)

25

 
NUMBER OF SEIZURES AND NUMBER OF INFRINGEMENTS BY TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR AND BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

ANNEX VII

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

C1

Fishing  without  holding  a  fishing  licence,  a  fishing  permit  or  any  other
authorisation required for fishing

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the  fishing
vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed  fishing  for,  or  keeping  on  board  of,  a  species  subject  to  a
prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure to comply with the rules and procedures relating to transhipments

E1

E2

E3

E4

F1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on  remote
transmission of fishing vessel movements

Failure  of  the  master  of  the  fishing  vessel  of  a  third  country  to  comply
with the applicable control rules when operating in Community waters

Landing of fishery products not complying with the Community rules on
control and enforcement

1
(1)

0
(8)

0
(7)

0
(9)

9
(21)

0
(3)

0
(2)

0
(3)

0
(1)

4
(12)

0
(1)

20
(95)

1
(4)

3
(33)

1
(13)

2
(69)

36
(36)

0
(15)

1
(1)

0
(1)

0
(1)

 0
(21)

 126
(138)

445
(445)

3
(7)

 2
(3)

83
(156)

0
(2)

 0
(8)

 0
(6)

0
(2)

 0
(16)

3
(3)

 3
(6)

 3
(3)

32
(32)

28
(28)

16
(16)

630
(648)

122
(122)

1
(1)

1
(1)

148
(154)

50
(52)

2
(2)

3
(3)

373
(375)

61
(61)

344
(344)

94
(94)

0
(1)

 1
(1)

1
(2)

 0
(3)

4
(13)

0
(6)

0
(3)

105
(143)

29
(31)

5
(5)

17
(24)

276
(479)

61
(84)

0
(1)

2
(4)

0
(1)

12
(18)

1
(3)

0
(4)

1
(26)

2
(21)

52
(88)

0
(37)

0
(1)

0
(38)

 7
(183)

 0
(56)

0
(2)

0
(2)

0
(7)

0
(7)

26

 58
(420)

0
(21)

76
(217)

40
(66)

1
(3)

120
(357)

 1
(135)

 0
(35)

0
(1)

5
(15)

9
(10)

1
(4)

26
(31)

0
(2)

7
(49)

0
(5)

0
(4)

0
(55)

0
(1)

0
(8)

0
(13)

0
(2)

 0
(27)

 0
(6)

 0
(6)

 0
(3)

 0
(6)

0
(2)

 0
(9)

0
(2)

 0
(4)

 0
(89)

 0
(6)

0
(3)

Sum:

37
(64)

0
(3)

0
(2)

722
(1258)

35
(42)

31
(70)

238
(529)

832
(887)

8
(12)

27
(115)

921
(1432)

253
(540)

0
(2)

371
(857)

94
(107)

2
(60)

0
(6)

233
(376)

227
(227)

0
(6)

2
(2)

2
(11)

2
(120)

 
F2

Storing, processing, placing on sale and transporting fishery products not
meeting the marketing standards in force

1
(15)

 15
(15)

13
(23)

46
(136)

NA

Unspecified

* in brackets, the number of cases discovered

 Sum:

 10
(49)

 34
(442)

 0
(118)

 980
(1021)

1614
(1785)

84
(288)

7
(26)

611
(1074)

50
(122)

0
(199)

0
(5)

207
(1579)

0
(1)

0
(2)

 0
(125)

 0
(125)

75
(389)

0
(5)

 3597
(6756)

27

 
NUMBER OF LICENCE WITHDRAWALS AND SERIOUS INFRINGEMENTS BY MEMBER STATE IN 2002

ANNEX VIII

Code  Type of behaviour

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

TOTAL

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

C1

Fishing without holding a fishing licence, a fishing permit or any
other authorisation required for fishing

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of  the
fishing vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed fishing for, or keeping on board of, a species subject to a
prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure  to  comply  with  the  rules  and  procedures  relating  to
transhipments

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

0
(2)

0
(3)

0
(1)

4
(12)

0
(1)

82
(95)

1
(4)

17
(33)

3
(13)

0
(69)

36
(36)

0
(15)

0
(1)

0
(1)

0
(1)

0
(21)

60
(138)

445
(445)

0
(7)

0
(3)

0
(156)

2
(3)

0
(6)

3
(3)

32
(32)

28
(28)

16
(16)

344
(648)

122
(122)

1
(1)

0
(1)

126
(154)

18
(52)

2
(2)

3
(3)

373
(375)

61
(61)

0
(2)

0
(8)

0
(6)

0
(2)

0
(16)

0
(1)

0
(18)

0
(3)

0
(4)

0
(26)

0
(21)

1
(88)

0
(1)

0
(1)

0
(2)

0
(3)

0
(6)

0
(3)

0
(143)

0
(31)

0
(5)

0
(24)

0
(479)

0
(84)

0
(1)

0
(8)

0
(7)

0
(9)

0
(21)

11
(183)

0
(56)

344
(344)

0
(37)

0
(13)

0
(1)

0
(5)

0
(4)

0
(55)

0
(1)

0
(8)

0
(13)

0
(6)

0
(2)

0
(9)

0
(2)

0
(4)

0
(420)

0
(21)

0
(217)

0
(66)

0
(3)

0
(357)

0
(135)

0
(35)

0
(2)

0
(27)

0
(89)

36
(64)

0
(3)

0
(2)

509
(1258)

34
(42)

28
(70)

101
(529)

467
(887)

3
(12)

20
(115)

502
(1432)

80
(540)

0
(2)

355
(857)

0
(15)

0
(10)

0
(4)

0
(31)

0
(2)

0
(49)

28

 
Code  Type of behaviour

BEL

DNK

DEU

GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX

NLD

AUT

PRT

FIN

SWE

GBR

TOTAL

E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

0
(3)

E3

E4

F1

F2

Deliberate failure to comply with the Community rules on remote
transmission of fishing vessel movements

Failure  of  the  master  of  the  fishing  vessel  of  a  third  country  to
comply  with  the  applicable  control  rules  when  operating  in
Community waters
Landing  of  fishery  products  not  complying  with  the  Community
rules on control and enforcement

Storing,  processing,  placing  on  sale  and  transporting  fishery
products not meeting the marketing standards in force

NA

Unspecified

0
(2)

2
(2)

2
(7)

1
(15)

0
(7)

94
(94)

0
(38)

227
(227)

0
(1)

0
(6)

0
(23)

6
(15)

0
(4)

0
(2)

0
(11)

0
(136)

0
(1)

0
(120)

0
(199)

0
(5)

0
(6)

0
(3)

0
(6)

0
(6)

0
(3)

0
(1)

94
(107)

2
(60)

0
(6)

229
(376)

7
(389)

0
(5)

Total for Member State:

0
(49)

111
(442)

0
(118)

560
(1021)

1614
(1785)

1
(288)

0
(26)

0
(1074)

0
(122)

0
(1579)

0
(2)

0
(125)

0
(125)

2286
(6756)

29

 
Code  Type of behaviour

BEL DNK DEU GRC ESP FRA

IRL

ITA LUX NLD AUT PRT FIN SWE GBR

TOTAL

ANNEX IX

NUMBER OF SERIOUS INFRINGEMENTS BY FISHING PORT IN 2002

12

1

 1

2

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

C1

Fishing without holding a fishing licence, a fishing permit or
any other authorisation required for fishing

1

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of
the fishing vessel

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

D4

Directed fishing for, or keeping on board of, a species subject
to a prohibition of fishing

D5

Unauthorised fishing

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

D7

Failure  to  comply  with  the  rules  and  procedures  relating  to
transhipments

2

 33

1

4

67

4

31

4

68

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

11

155

239

13

E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

22

56

E3

E4

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on
remote transmission of fishing vessel movements

Failure of the master of the fishing vessel of a third country to
comply  with  the  applicable  control  rules  when  operating  in
Community waters

30

150

14

14

8

59

1

1

111

1

9

5

45

42

 1

156

 66

3

120

31

5

18

456

52

1

4

9

1

2

27

22

45

2

16

3

2

311

20

17

204

96

6

59

578

234

2

466

58

4

 
F1

F2

Landing  of  fishery  products  not  complying  with 
Community rules on control and enforcement

the

Storing,  processing,  placing  on  sale  and  transporting  fishery
products not meeting the marketing standards in force

NA Unspecified

7

8

167

6

17

11

86

191

111

Total for Member State:

12

339

780

94

926

97

2

2250

31

 
AMOUNT PAID BY THE FISHERY INDUSTRY IN EACH MEMBER STATE AS A CONSEQUENCE OF SERIOUS INFRINGEMENTS

ANNEX X

Code  Type of behaviour

BEL DNK DEU GRC

ESP

FRA

IRL

ITA

LUX NLD AUT PRT

FIN SWE GBR

TOTAL

182833

12800

206

10152

206796

A1

Obstructing the work of fisheries inspectors

A2

Falsifying, concealing, destroying or tampering with evidence

B1

Obstructing the work of observers

805

671

68

C1

Fishing without holding a fishing licence, a fishing permit or
any other authorisation required for fishing

1703 47545

47962

650958

2000

42800

293491

62246

C2

Fishing under cover of a falsified document

900

17428

C3

Falsifying,  deleting  or  concealing  the  identification  marks  of
the fishing vessel

83

900

35885

1110

204

831

D1

Using or keeping on board prohibited fishing gear

1341

7480

2800

42564

60500

20000

138516

27950

30736

18867

350754

D2

Using prohibited fishing methods

1342

363646

369039

27703

620

6944

3997

773291

D3

Failing to lash or stow prohibited fishing gear

1200

211256

5578

218034

D4

Directed fishing for, or keeping on board of, a species subject
to a prohibition of fishing

4696

1000

300

4001

3750

46250

5164

505

18626

84292

D5

Unauthorised fishing

10061

2845 149996

755437

12000

706214

33911

100

5036

1675600

D6

Failure to comply with the rules on minimum sizes

21411 16771

27532

119288

12675

41734

5901

13119

12951

271382

D7

Failure  to  comply  with  the  rules  and  procedures  relating  to
transhipments

E1

Falsifying or failing to record data in logbooks, etc.

6500 29892

5630

782714

825

84550

61

21157

4854

420

2963

759268

1698834

E2

Tampering with the satellite-based vessel monitoring system

1500

113939

E3

Deliberate  failure  to  comply  with  the  Community  rules  on
remote transmission of fishing vessel movements

1514

1135

191880

307319

8235

10884

32

739

1148705

19438

37903

 
E4

F1

F2

Failure of the master of the fishing vessel of a third country to
comply  with  the  applicable  control  rules  when  operating  in
Community waters
Landing  of  fishery  products  not  complying  with 
Community rules on control and enforcement

the

Storing,  processing,  placing  on  sale  and  transporting  fishery
products not meeting the marketing standards in force

NA Unspecified

1610

2361

509607

9200

1370

12494

575

116366

155

5299

3697

155

527086

135493

Total of fines

8000 75893 82868 607730 3794949

92325 215600 1337550

56998

164142

420

3218 1029012

7468705

Number of active vessels

128

3656

2240

19483

14813

8098

1503

15963

Fine average per vessel:

62,5 20,08

37,0

31,2

256,2

11,4

143,4

80,8

952

59,9

10427 3525

1840

7563

15,7

0,1

1,7

136,1

90191

82,8

33