REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 establishing a community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing (the IUU Regulation)
Date: 2020-12-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, exchange of information, fishing controls, fishing vessel, illegal fishing, international cooperation, sea fishing, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 9.12.2020  COM(2020) 772 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 establishing a community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing (the IUU Regulation)  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
AND THE COUNCIL 

on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 establishing a 
Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and 
unregulated (IUU) fishing (the IUU Regulation) 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE 
COUNCIL .............................................................................................................................................. 1 

1.

2.

Introduction

 .................................................................................................................................... 2 

State of play – progress since the 2015 Communication

 .............................................................. 4 

2.1

Cooperation with Member States

 .......................................................................................... 4 

 

 

 

 

Member States and their flag State responsibilities

 ............................................................... 4 

Member States and their coastal State responsibilities

 ......................................................... 5 

Member States and their port State responsibilities

 .............................................................. 5 

Member States and their market State responsibility: the catch certification scheme

 ......... 6 

  Use of mutual assistance system between Member States and the Commission and with 
non-EU countries

 ............................................................................................................................ 7 

2.2

Cooperation with non-EU countries

 ....................................................................................... 7 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Levelling the playing field through dialogue

 ........................................................................... 7 

Building a network of allies

 ..................................................................................................... 9 

Promoting catch certification schemes

 ................................................................................ 10 

Fostering implementation of the Agreement on Port State Measures

 ................................ 10 

Impact of IUU dialogues on SFPA countries

 .......................................................................... 11 

Support to non-EU countries

 ................................................................................................ 11 

2.3

Other international cooperation frameworks and cooperation with stakeholders

 ............. 12 

3. Main challenges in implementing the IUU Regulation

 ............................................................... 13 

3.1

Implementation within the EU

.............................................................................................. 13 

 

 

 

Dialogues with non-EU countries

 .......................................................................................... 14 

Strengthening the international governance to tackle IUU fishing

 ...................................... 14 

Cooperation and coordination

 .............................................................................................. 15 

4.

Conclusions

 ................................................................................................................................... 15 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1. Introduction 

As  provided  for  by  Article  55(1)  of  the  Regulation,  this  reports  informs  the  European 
Parliament and the Council about the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 
establishing  a  Community  system  to  prevent,  deter  and  eliminate  illegal,  unreported  and 
unregulated  (IUU)  fishing.  The  report  takes  stock  mainly  of  information  provided  by  the 
Member States in the form of responses to a questionnaire sent by the Commission1 since the 
last Communication of 1 October 20152, but also of any other relevant information received 
by the Commission from any stakeholders in the given period. It also  gives an overview of 
activities  that  contribute  towards  achieving  the  objectives  of  the  IUU  Regulation.  On  this 
basis, it also identifies the main challenges in terms of implementation. 

IUU  fishing  remains  one  of  the  greatest  threats  to  the  sustainable  use  of  fishery  resources. 
Unfortunately,  the  dynamic,  adaptable  and  clandestine  nature  of  IUU  fishing  makes  it 
impossible  to  estimate  its  impact  in  a  straightforward  way.  However,  rough  calculations 
indicate that IUU fishing across the world’s oceans weighs in at around 11–26 million tonnes 
of fish each year, representing an annual price tag of EUR 9–21 billion3. 

The  United  Nations  General  Assembly  specifically  urged  the  international  community  to 
‘effectively  regulate  harvesting  and  end  overfishing,  illegal,  unreported  and  unregulated 
fishing and destructive fishing practices by 20204’ in target 14.4 of Goal 14 of ‘Life below 
Water’,  part  of  the  2030  Sustainable  Development  Agenda  adopted  in  2015.  The  EU  is 
therefore strongly  committed to  achieving a steady reduction in  IUU fishing and ultimately 
eliminating the practice. 

The Communication on the European Green Deal for the European Union5 identifies the zero 
tolerance approach to IUU fishing as a priority. This approach is also an important aspect of 
the EU biodiversity strategy for 20306 and key to a global transition towards sustainable food 
systems, as stated in the farm to fork strategy7. It calls for strong EU action under the external 
dimension  of  the  common  fisheries  policy  (CFP),  notably  through  efforts  to  eliminate  IUU 
fishing in regional fisheries management organisations (RFMO)8, in the context of the EU’s 
sustainable  fisheries  partnership  agreements  (SFPA),  and  by  completing  the  revision  of  the 
EU  control  rules9.  Combating  IUU  fishing  worldwide  is  also  an  important  element  of  the 

Information provided by Member States, covering 2016-2017. Such information is provided every two 

COM(2015) 480 of 1 October 2015. 
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6069e.pdf 
‘Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and 

1 
years, based on a questionnaire prepared by the Commission. 
2 
3 
4 
unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order 
to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable 
yield as determined by their biological characteristics’. 
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=14&Target=14.4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy. 

COM(2019) 640 of 11 December 2019. 
COM(2020) 380 of 20 May 2020. 
COM(2020) 381 of 20 May 2020. 
For the detailed list, see:  http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/international/rfmo/index_en.htm 
 Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system 

2 

 
 
 
                                                           
Joint  Communication  on  International  Ocean  Governance  of  201610.  Finally,  the  policy  of 
working  to  eliminate  IUU  fishing  is  relevant  in  the  context  of  the  EU  Maritime  Security 
Agenda11. 

The  EU  system  to  prevent,  deter  and  eliminate  IUU  fishing  is  embedded  in  international 
fisheries law, notably:  

 
 
 

the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 
the 1995 United Nations Fisheries Stocks Agreement (UNFSA), and 
the  1993  Agreement  to  Promote  Compliance  with  International  Conservation  and 
Management  Measures  by  Fishing  Vessels  on 
the  High  Seas  (Compliance 
Agreement).  

These instruments are interpreted and substantiated by non-binding instruments, such as those 
developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in particular the 1995 Code of 
Conduct  for  Responsible  Fisheries  (Code  of  Conduct)  and  the  2001  International  Plan  of 
Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IPOA-
IUU),  one  of  several  international  action  plans  adopted  in  connection  with  the  Code  of 
Conduct. Collectively, these legal instruments – both binding and non-binding – comprise a 
set of measures that reinforce and complement each other.  

In addition, to strengthen implementation of the IPOA-IUU, the FAO adopted, in 2009, the 
Agreement on Port  State Measures to  Prevent,  Deter  and Eliminate  Illegal,  Unreported and 
Unregulated  Fishing12  (PSMA),  which  entered  into  force  in  June  201613.  The  PSMA  is  the 
first and only legally binding global instrument to address IUU fishing directly as its primary 
target. Although it does not create new international tools to combat IUU fishing, it sets out 
minimum standards for exercising port State jurisdiction in the context of IUU fishing. Other 
relevant  FAO  contributions  of  recent  years  include  the  2014  Voluntary  Guidelines  on  Flag 
State  Performance  and,  in  2017,  the  FAO  Voluntary  Guidelines  for  Catch  Documentation 
Schemes.  The  EU  has  made  major  contributions  to  these  initiatives,  which  help  to  further  
strengthen  international  fisheries  law  and  provide  significant  guidance  in  the  fight  against 
IUU fishing.  

The unique EU approach to tackling IUU fishing is built on Regulation (CE) 1005/2008. In 
adopting  and  implementing  this  regulation,  the  EU  has  pioneered  a  comprehensive 
framework  to  combat  IUU  fishing  that  turns  intentions  into  action  and  establishes  a  global 
level playing field in the fisheries sector.  

The Regulation states that all countries, whether Member States or non-EU countries, have a 
responsibility to fulfil their international obligations as flag, port, coastal or market States. It 
has  proved  to  be  a  transparent  and  non-discriminatory  instrument,  applicable  to  all  vessels 
engaged in the commercial exploitation of fishery resources and to all EU nationals involved 
in fishing activities under any flag.  

The  EU  is  an  active  participant  in  five  tuna  RFMOs,  12  non-tuna  RFMOs,  and  other  fisheries 

 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32009R1224 
10 
organisations.  For the complete list, see: https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/international/rfmo_en  
11 
12 
13 

https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/policy/maritime-security_en.  
http://www.fao.org/port-state-measures/en/ 
The EU approved the Agreement through Council Decision 2011/443/EU of 20 June 2011. 

3 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
Ten years after the entry into force of the IUU Regulation, the EU is seen as a major player in 
the  fight  against  IUU  fishing  worldwide.  Persevering  in  actions  to  tackle  IUU  fishing  will 
further consolidate the EU’s role in this area. 

 2. State of play – progress since the 2015 Communication 

The  2015  Communication  referred  to  further  work  to  improve  the  current  system  in  place 
and, possibly, to simplify and modernise the implementation of the IUU Regulation, notably 
by  moving  from  a  paper-based  catch  certification  system  to  an  electronic  one.  The 
Commission  announced  that  it  would  be  continuing  to  cooperate  with  non-EU  countries 
through  dialogue  and  the  possibility  of  offering  technical  and  development  aid  to  non-EU 
countries, to address their IUU fishing problems.  

The four interconnected areas of action for which the IUU Regulation provides are: 

 
 
 
 

the EU catch certification scheme, 
the system of mutual assistance between Member States, 
the process of cooperation with non-EU countries, and 
the listing of IUU vessels.  

All these tools have proven effective in combating IUU fishing over the past five years. 

A number of tangible results have been recorded since the last Communication. This report 
presents key achievements under the IUU Regulation between 2015 and 2019. 

2.1 

Cooperation with Member States 

  Member States and their flag State responsibilities 

The  EU  consolidated  its  actions  as  regards  the  flag  State  responsibilities  of  Member 
States by adopting new measures to manage the operations of its fleet outside EU waters 
more effectively (SMEFF)14. All fishing activities of EU vessels carried out outside EU 
waters  or  falling  within  the  purview  of  a  regional  fisheries  management  organisation 
(RFMO)  must  be  specifically  authorised  by  the  flag  Member  State,  which  is  also 
these  fishing  authorisations15.  The 
responsible  for 
Commission  transmits  the  authorisations  to  relevant  RFMOs  and  non-EU  countries, 
provided  that  the  relevant  conditions  and  eligibility  criteria  are  met.  In  addition,  even 
outside EU waters, EU vessels remain subject both to EU control rules16 and to those laid 
down in the IUU Regulation.  

the  correct  management  of 

Regulation (EU) 2017/2403 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on 

14 
the Sustainable Management of External Fishing Fleets replacing Council Regulation EC) 1006/2008. 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32017R2403 
15 
Mediterranean, GFCM): 5,843 fishing vessels, corresponding to 8,818 fishing authorisations. 
16  Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for 
ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy. 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32009R1224 

Figures on June 2019 (excepting the area of competence of the General Fisheries Commission for the 

4 

 
 
                                                           
After evaluating the current fisheries control system, the Commission also decided to start 
revising it. The Commission proposal on its revision was adopted on 30 May 201817. The 
Commission decided to propose a number of changes to the Control Regulation, as well 
as targeted amendments to the IUU Regulation and the EFCA Founding Regulation. The 
overall objective of the revision is to modernise, strengthen and simplify the EU fisheries 
control  system  and  extend  the  level  playing  field  in  fisheries  controls.  In  particular,  the 
proposal  clarifies,  reinforces  and  harmonises  the  enforcement  provisions,  notably  as 
regards measures and sanctions for serious infringements. Its ambitions also include: 

  creating  a  more  reliable  and  complete  fisheries  data  system,  including  fully 

digitised reporting of catches, to be applicable to all EU fishing vessels18;  
  extending the electronic tracking system to all vessels, including small ones; 
 
introducing new weighing procedures for fisheries products;  
  beefing up catch registration rules for recreational fisheries;  
 

improving the traceability of EU and imported fishery and aquaculture products, 
and 

  beefing up rules on fishing gear. 

  Member States and their coastal State responsibilities 

The  same  control  rules  that  apply  to  EU  vessels  are  applicable  to  non-EU  countries’ 
vessels operating in EU waters as well, unless otherwise agreed with the non-EU country 
concerned.  

The  Commission  maintains  close  cooperation  with  the  Member  States  to  prevent,  deter 
and  detect  any  IUU  fishing  activities.  It  also  encourages  Member  States  to  report  any 
suspicion of IUU fishing carried out by vessels from non-EU countries in their waters19 
and makes full use of the mutual assistance system to keep fish caught illegally out of the 
EU market. The Commission also facilitates regular cooperation between Member States 
and non-EU countries. 

 

Member States and their port State responsibilities 

The  Control  Regulation  provides  for  an  appropriate  port  control  framework,  including 
inspections in port or on landing. The IUU Regulation complements and provides for an 
effective  scheme  of  inspections  in  port  for  non-EU  country  fishing  vessels  calling  at  
Member States’ ports. 

In their reports to the Commission, the Member States provide information on the results 
of port inspections and on direct landings and transhipments of fishery products by non-
EU country fishing vessels20. 

Over  2016–2017,  around  4,349  non-EU  vessels  landed  in  EU  ports,  and  EU  Member 
States inspected 635 of these vessels. 

COM (2018) 368 final of 30 May 2018.  
Including vessels measuring less than 12 metres. 
36 sightings of foreign fishing vessels were reported by Member States over 2016-2017. Information 

17 
18 
19 
based on Member States’ reports covering 2016-2017 in accordance with Article 55.1. 
20 

Again under Article 55.1 of the IUU Regulation. 

5 

 
 
 
                                                           
  Member States and their market State responsibility: the catch certification scheme 

As one of the world’s biggest markets for fishery products, the EU has the responsibility 
to ensure that fishery products stemming from IUU fishing do not reach its market. 

The catch certification scheme established by the IUU Regulation has proven effective in 
keeping fish caught in this way out of the EU market. 

More  than  92  countries  have  notified  the  Commission  of  the  authorities  empowered  in 
each country to attest the veracity of the information set out in catch certificates issued for 
products  exported  to  the  EU  market  (the  ‘competent  authorities’).  On  average,  around 
200,000  catch  certificates  and  25,000  processing  statements  are  submitted  to  Member 
States’ competent authorities for imports every year21. In 2016-2019, refusals of imports 
into  the  EU  market  of  fishery  products  in  accordance  with  the  IUU  catch  certification 
scheme continued to decline. 

As anticipated in the 2015 Communication, in May 2019 the Commission launched22 an 
IT system named CATCH, designed to digitalise catch certificates and related procedures 
for  use  on  importation.  The  objective  behind  CATCH  is  to  develop  a  web-based 
application  to  support  management  of  official  documents  and  automate  the  related 
procedures,  as  laid  down  in  the  IUU  Regulation.  The  ultimate  purpose  of  such  an  EU-
wide  system  is  to  facilitate  and  harmonise  the  verification  procedures  carried  out  by 
Member  States’  competent  authorities,  and  to  help  ensure  a  level  playing  field  for  EU 
importers. 

Developments  in  CATCH  follow  the  FAO  Voluntary  Guidelines  on  the  Catch 
Documentation Schemes23 adopted in 2017. CATCH has been developed on TRACES, a 
platform with an existing 30,000 users from over 80 countries worldwide. TRACES has 
been  used  by  Member  States’  authorities  and  EU  importers  since  2005  for  checks 
involving sanitary requirements for intra-EU trade and imports of animals, food, feed and 
plants; now it is also being used to check catch certificates. The Commission’s proposal 
to  revise  the  Control  Regulation  includes  legal  provisions  on  the  use  of  CATCH.  The 
compulsory  use  of  CATCH  depends  on  the  finalisation  of  the  ongoing  revision  of  the 
fisheries  control  system  and  its  entry  into  force.  Until  then,  EU  countries  and  their 
national operators will use it on a voluntary basis24. 

The  Commission  is  focusing  on  the  work  currently  being  done  by  UN  CEFACT  (the 
United  Nations  Centre  for  Trade  Facilitation  and  Electronic  Business)  to  explore  the 
possible  use  of  the  FLUX  format  to  ensure  interoperability  with  CATCH  of  non-EU 
countries’ IT environments for checks on fishery products. It is also working to establish 
an  electronic  system  of  certificate  exchange  (EU  CSW-CERTEX25)  for  all  EU  customs 

Commission estimate based on notification from Member States under Article 18(5) of the IUU 

On average, EUR 350 000 are allocated each year for the development of CATCH. 
http://www.fao.org/iuu-fishing/international-framework/voluntary-guidelines-for-catch-

21 
Regulation. 
22 
23 
documentation-schemes/en/ 
24 
https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/docs/body/catch-it-system_en.pdf 
25            https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/general-information-customs/electronic-customs/eu-single-
window-environment-for-customs_en 

For more information on the system, see: 

6 

 
 
                                                           
 
under  the  EU  ‘single  window  environment  for  customs’  initiative.  CATCH  is  set  to 
become part of EU CSW-CERTEX.  

  Use  of  mutual  assistance  system  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  and 

with non-EU countries  

The mutual assistance system established by Article 51 of the IUU Regulation has proven 
its  worth  in  helping  Member  States  implement  the  IUU  Regulation.  All  Member  States 
have appointed IUU single liaison officers to deal with this task. 

The system facilitates cooperation between Member States and the Commission and with 
non-EU countries. This is essential to ensure that IUU fishing is properly investigated and 
sanctioned.  The  system  has  facilitated  an  ongoing  exchange  of  information  on  alerts, 
intelligence, and the results of enquiries conducted where there are hints of IUU fishing 
activities. 

Since  2015,  the  Commission  has  sent  over  170  alerts  to  Member  States’  single  liaison 
officers  to  guide  the  checks  they  conduct  on  situations  of  risk  and  to  request 
investigations  on  presumed  IUU  fishing  activities  and  serious  infringements.  Member 
States  also  regularly  invoke  the  IUU  Regulation’s  provisions  on  mutual  assistance  to 
cooperate  with  each  other  and  with  the  administrative  authorities  of  non-EU  countries. 
Overall,  this  has  improved  the  implementation  of  the  IUU  Regulation.  Active  use  of 
mutual  assistance  has  proved  effective  to  block  the  importing  into  the  EU  market  of 
fishery  products  worth  millions  of  euros  derived  from  IUU  fishing,  especially  from  the 
Horn of Africa. 

2.2 

Cooperation with non-EU countries 

Since 2015, the Commission has continued to interact with and support several non-EU 
countries in effecting fundamental reforms of their fisheries policies. Such reforms have 
led to revisions of national legislation, bringing it into line with international obligations; 
stronger  administrative  structures;  and  improved  monitoring,  control  and  surveillance 
(MCS)  systems.  In  this  way,  the  EU’s  sustainable  fisheries  partnership  agreements 
(SFPAs) with non-EU countries have also helped beef up governance, while improving 
non-EU  countries’  capacity  and  use of tools  to  combat  IUU fishing. Specific measures 
have been implemented using the SFPAs’ sectoral support component. 

In general, non-EU countries have taken an active stance on the problem of IUU fishing 
and  have  shown  willingness  to  take  stronger  action.  This  demonstrates  ownership  of 
reforms which bring their fisheries control systems into line with international standards. 
However, experience also shows that only strong and persistent political will can achieve 
lasting results in the form of stable fisheries compliance.  

  Levelling the playing field through dialogue  

Bilateral  dialogues  on  IUU  fishing  with  non-EU  countries  remain  the  centrepiece  for 
cooperation under the IUU Regulation.  

7 

 
 
Whether  the  Commission  engages  in  a  dialogue  depends  on  a  series  of  indicators 
determining  the  efficiency  of  the  measures  taken  by  different  countries  to  combat  IUU 
fishing.  

This assessment takes into account whether non-EU countries act as flag, coastal, port or 
market States. Relevant indicators include compliance with international law instruments, 
implementation  of  voluntary  guidelines,  effective  implementation  of  RFMO  measures, 
fleet policy, conservation, management and control of waters under national jurisdictions, 
enforcement  frameworks,  and  the  scale  of  fisheries  production  (stocks,  fleets)  or  trade 
flows. The assessment also takes into account information about a country’s history with 
regard  to  IUU  fishing,  with  particular  attention  given  to  the  specific  constraints  facing 
developing countries, when relevant. 

Since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  IUU  Regulation,  the  Commission  has  engaged  in 
dialogues  or  other  forms  of  cooperation  with  over  60  countries.  In  the  context  of  26 
dialogues  held  since  201226,  with  the  Commission’s  active  support,  15  partners  have 
successfully  reformed  their  fisheries  management  systems  by  aligning  their  legal 
frameworks on international obligations as flag, port and market States.  

In other cases, however, informal dialogue is not enough of a deterrent to make a non-EU 
country address the shortcomings identified.  

The IUU Regulation establishes the now widely known ‘carding system’27, empowering 
the  Commission  to  notify  a  non-EU  country  of  the  risk  of  being  identified  as  a  non-
cooperating  country  in  the  fight  against  IUU  fishing  (pre-identification  procedure,  
‘yellow  card’).  The  Commission  engages  in  a  formal  dialogue  with  the  pre-identified 
country and establishes cooperation based on an action plan. 

Since the end of 2015, seven yellow cards have been successfully lifted, with important 
reforms  in  the  fisheries  sector  achieved  in  the  countries  concerned.  In  the  same  period, 
nine  yellow  cards  have  been  issued,  formalising  dialogues  to  tackle  the  shortcomings 
identified28. 

In  cases  where  the  pre-identified  country  fails  to  resolve  the  reported  problems, 
disregarding  its  own  international  obligations,  the  Commission  identifies  it  as  a  non-
cooperating  country  in  the  fight  against  IUU  fishing  (the  identification  procedure,  ‘red 
card’). 

While  pre-identification  does  not  entail  any  sanctions,  the  identification  procedure  has 
important  consequences,  including  trade  prohibitions.  Member  States  are  obliged  to 
refuse imports of wild marine fisheries products caught by vessels flying the flag of the 
non-EU country concerned. 

Identification is followed by a Commission proposal to the Council to place the country 
on the list of non-cooperating third countries (the ‘listing procedure’). 

This ‘blacklisting’ entails measures beyond prohibiting imports, such as:  

Articles 31 and 32 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008. 
https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/illegal-fishing-overview-of-existing-procedures-

26 
27 
third-countries_en.pdf  
28 
Ibid. 

8 

 
 
                                                           
  a prohibition on purchasing fishing vessels from the country concerned;  
  a  prohibition  on  such  countries  reflagging  fishing  vessels  with  the  flag  of  a 

Member State;  

  no chartering agreements;  
  a prohibition on exporting EU fishing vessels;  
  a prohibition on private trade agreements with EU nationals;  
  a prohibition on joint fishing operations with the EU; 
  possible  denunciation  of  standing  bilateral  fisheries  agreements  or  partnerships; 

and/or 

  no further negotiations to conclude bilateral fisheries agreements or partnerships.  

Since the end of 2015, one red card has been successfully lifted, and de-listing has taken 
place,  with  major  reforms  achieved  in  the  country  concerned.  During  the  same  period, 
two red cards have been issued, formalising dialogues on the most relevant shortcomings 
identified,  with  subsequent  listing  of  the  countries  concerned  by  the  Council29.  In  one 
case  it  was  necessary  to  denounce  a  sustainable  fishing  partnership  agreement  under 
Article 38 of the IUU Regulation. 

Cooperation through dialogues with non-EU countries achieves tangible results and leads 
to better governance, in particular: 

revised legislation; 

 
  adoption of national plans of action (NPoA) in line with the FAO’s IPoA-IUU; 
 
  better cooperation, coordination and mobilisation of different relevant authorities; 

 stronger sanctions; 

and 
 political commitment to combating IUU fishing at the highest level.  

 

The dialogue processes have provided a framework for countries to beef up MCS systems 
through  improved  monitoring  of  fisheries  activities,  including  vessel  monitoring  system 
(VMS)  requirements  for  national  and  distant  water  fleets,  and  inspection  and  control 
procedures.  However,  as  the  most  recent  yellow  card  shows,  lack  of  engagement  can 
rapidly lead to deterioration of the frameworks put in place to fight against IUU fishing, 
resulting in a second carding. 

  Building a network of allies 

Combating IUU fishing requires coordinated action, and no country can achieve success 
by  acting  alone.  Experience  has  shown  that  combating  IUU  fishing  is  much  more 
effective if there are synergies at regional level, rather than countries acting in isolation. 
Whenever a country strengthens its system of controls on  IUU fishing, there is a risk that 
those  who  flout  the  rules  may  move  to  other  countries  with  less  stringent  laws  and 
controls.  

Success  therefore  lies  in  involving  as  many  countries  as  possible  in  a  continuous 
proactive  and  vigilant  approach  against  IUU  fishing  at  international  level.  Several 
bilateral IUU working groups have been established with major fishing countries. These 

29 

Ibid. 

9 

 
 
                                                           
serve  as  platforms  for  regular  exchanges,  and  follow  up  relevant  action  to  combat  IUU 
fishing. 

In  line  with  the  external  dimension  of  the  common  fisheries  policy,  the  EU30  promotes 
actions in RFMOs based on EU principles and standards. Together with other countries, 
the EU has  actively supported efforts to  boost anti-IUU measures in  RFMOs, including 
the  cross-listing  of  IUU  vessels  amongst  RFMOs  and  provisions  penalising  nationals 
involved in IUU fishing. 

The Commission is supporting various regional initiatives, such as the creation of an IUU 
Network  in  the  Association  of  South-East  Asian  Nations  (ASEAN),  an  operational 
platform  for  real-time  information  sharing  that  supports  ASEAN  members’  day-to-day 
activities  in  a  very  practical  way.  Regional  capacity-building  projects  to  support  the 
development  and  management  of  fisheries,  including  boosting  capacity  to  combat  IUU 
fishing, further support cooperation with regional and sub-regional bodies. 

  Promoting catch certification schemes 

An  important  part  of  the  dialogues  with  non-EU  countries  focuses  on  their  traceability 
systems  for  imports  and  exports.  Non-EU  countries  are  required  to  demonstrate  their 
capability to issue reliable catch certificates. In line with the FAO Voluntary Guidelines 
on  the  Catch  Documentation  Schemes,  the  Commission  makes  recommendations  for 
improvements  and  in  some  cases  provides  on-the-spot  training  in  validating  EU  catch 
certificates and conducting related checks.  

 

Fostering implementation of the Agreement on Port State Measures

The Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA) entered into force on 5 June 2016. The EU 
approved the Agreement by Council Decision of 20 June 201131. 

The  PSMA  is  the  first  binding  international  agreement  that  specifically  targets  IUU 
fishing. Its objective is to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing by preventing vessels 
engaged in IUU fishing activities from using ports and landing their catches. The PSMA 
thus  reduces  the  incentive  of  such  vessels  to  continue  operating,  while  also  blocking 
fishery  products  obtained  through  IUU  fishing  from  reaching  national  and  international 
markets. 

The number of parties to the PSMA now exceeds 65. This is a real success. Several of the 
new parties acceded to and ratified the PSMA – thanks in part to their IUU dialogues with 
the EU - by introducing reforms of their legal systems with regard to fisheries. 

However, ratification is only the first step in putting this treaty into practice. The PSMA 
also provides for funding mechanisms for developing states, with technical assistance and 
capacity  development  provided  through  the  FAO  Global  Capacity  Development 
Programme. The EU and the Commission provide funding in support of this programme. 

Represented by the European Commission. 
COUNCIL DECISION of 20 June 2011 on the approval, on behalf of the European Union, of the 

30 
31 
Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated 
Fishing (2011/443/EU). 

10 

 
 
 
                                                           
  Impact of IUU dialogues on SFPA countries 

There  is  a  clear  connection  between  the  role  of  EU  sustainable  fisheries  partnership 
agreements  (SFPAs)32  with  partner  countries  and  the  EU’s  fight  against  IUU  fishing. 
Currently  there  are  20  SFPAs  with  partner  countries  in  the  Atlantic,  Indian  and  Pacific 
Oceans, of which 13 have active protocols allowing for fishing activities. 

SFPAs  support  IUU  policy  objectives  through  tools  including  capacity-building 
programmes and training, and by beefing up MCS systems, including electronic reporting 
systems, etc. This has positive spillovers in the fight against IUU fishing.  

To  ensure  the  coherence  of  the  external  dimension  of  the  common  fisheries  policy,  the 
Commission  proposes  that  any  standing  bilateral  fisheries  agreement  or  fisheries 
partnership agreement be denounced if a non-EU country fails to meet its obligations to 
combat IUU fishing, as laid down in Article 38 of the IUU Regulation. 

While listing a third  country  as non-cooperating  on  IUU  fishing  (giving it  a ‘red  card’) 
leads  to  cessation  of  the  SFPA  in  force,  the  Commission  refrains,  on  its  own  initiative, 
from  renewing  SFPA  protocols  with  countries  which  have  not  tackled  shortcomings 
identified under yellow cards. 

  Support to non-EU countries 

The  IUU  dialogues  are  often  accompanied  by  supporting  programmes  from  different 
sources. 

The  EU,  in  close  contact  with  the  FAO  and  the  World  Bank,  promotes  coordination 
among the various support  providers to  ensure that support is  channelled in  response to 
identified needs. This should also avoid duplication of support. 

The  EU  and  the  Commission  provide  funding  under  the  FAO’s  Global  Capacity 
Development  Programme.  This  programme  is  designed  to  help  developing  countries  
implement the Port State Measures Agreement through technical assistance and capacity 
development.  Moreover,  the  Commission,  often  together  with  the  European  Fisheries 
Control  Agency  (EFCA),  has  provided  bespoke  capacity-building  sessions  on  catch 
certification,  MCS  tools  and  policy  to  certain  non-EU  countries,  in  response  to  specific 
requests. 

To boost checks on the information in the catch certificates, since 2016 the Commission 
has also facilitated the development by EFCA and the European Maritime Safety Agency 
(EMSA) of new functionalities in EFCA’s electronic surveillance tools (EFCA Integrated 
Maritime  Services).  The  purpose  of  these  functionalities  is  to  assist  and  increase  IUU 
deterrence  worldwide  (e.g.  off  the  West  African  coast  and  in  the  North  Atlantic  and 
Arctic  areas).  The  Commission  has  also  helped  EFCA  undertake  various  capacity-
building actions for fisheries inspectors in non-EU countries. 

The  EU  provides  dedicated  development  funding  to  Africa,  the  Pacific  and  the  Indian 
Ocean region to support the development and management of sustainable fisheries. This 

32 

https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/international/agreements_en 

11 

 
 
                                                           
 
includes action to help boost their capacity to combat IUU fishing. In particular, the EU 
committed: 

  EUR 35 million for Pacific ACP states, under the Pacific-European Union Marine 

Partnership (PEUMP)33, 

  EUR  15  million  for  Western  Africa,  under  the  improved  regional  fisheries 

governance in western Africa programme (PESCAO)34, and 

  EUR 28 million for the Indian Ocean region, under the ECOFISH programme35.  

As regards PEUMP, the budget earmarked for action to counter IUU fishing is EUR 3.9 
million.  The  measures  concerned  are  designed  to  improve  monitoring  control  and 
surveillance  of  both  oceanic  and  coastal  fisheries,  legislation,  access  to  information 
(transparency), and effective marine area management. 

For  PESCAO,  the  planned  amount  for  IUU  measures  and  projects  is  EUR  7.9  million. 
Measures  under  this  project  include  technical  assistance  provided  by  the  European 
Fisheries  Control  Agency  (EFCA)  to  the  Sub-Regional  Fisheries  Commission  (SRFC), 
the  Fisheries  Committee  for  the  Western  Central  Gulf  of  Guinea  (FCWC)  and  their 
member  countries,  in  a  coordinated  manner,  using  the  experience  gained  in  the  EU 
context.  Specifically,  in  2019  EFCA  delivered  five  training  sessions  in  the  region  on 
fisheries  monitoring,  control  and  surveillance  as  well  as  on  inspections  and  the  use  of 
VMS,  AIS,  radio  communications  and  satellite  imagery.  It  also  provided  support  for  a 
review  of  fisheries  legislation  in  one  country  and  for  the  adoption  of  a  NPOA-IUU  in 
another. Through PESCAO, the SRFC organised three joint  control campaigns in  2019, 
with the participation of at least three member countries and the support of EFCA and the 
French navy. These resulted in 157 inspections. PESCAO will support the deployment of 
regional  VMS  systems  in  the  two  sub-regions,  significantly  increasing  their  capacity  to 
combat IUU fishing. 

The  ECOFISH  programme  includes  a  specific  pillar  to  boost  capacity  to  combat  IUU 
fishing  in  the  Western  Indian  Ocean.  EUR  4.4  million  are  earmarked  for  projects 
designed  mainly  to  provide  training  for  fishing  inspectors,  enable  participation  in  joint 
patrols, and facilitate the use and exchange of VMS data at regional level36.  

The  EU  has  also  supported  partner  countries  in  ensuring  proper  implementation  of  the 
catch  certification  scheme,  by  such  means  as  workshops  organised  through  the  IUU 
Working Groups with major fishing nations outside the EU. 

2.3  Other 
stakeholders 

international  cooperation  frameworks  and  cooperation  with 

Awareness  of  the  importance  of  combating  IUU  fishing  has  increased  significantly 
worldwide in recent years. IUU fishing has become a recurren topic in fora such as the 
G20, the G7 and the Davos Economic Forum. 

Financed under the 11th European Development Fund (EDF), 

33  
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2015.058.01.0001.01.ENG. 
34 Ibid. 
35 Ibid. 
36 

Annex 2 to the Commission Decision on the Annual Action Programme 2018 in favour of Eastern and 

Southern Africa and the Indian Ocean to be financed from the 11th European Development Fund. 

12 

 
 
                                                           
 
The Commission has stepped up cooperation and coordination with international partners 
such as the World Bank, the FAO, Interpol, and the United Nations Office for Drugs and 
Crime (UNODC), to ensure that the measures taken are consistent among themselves and 
to create synergies in EU cooperation with specific non-EU countries. 

Structured  cooperation  with  EU  NAVFOR37  has  improved  the  identification  of  IUU 
fishing off the Horn of Africa. Coordination with measures taken under the EU Maritime 
Security Agenda is also beneficial in responding in a structured way to potential threats 
involving IUU fishing and related crimes at sea. 

The  Market  and  Long-Distance  Advisory  Councils  are  one  type  of  forum  for  ongoing 
cooperation and exchanges with stakeholders. The Commission also receives alerts and 
data  from  non-governmental  organisations  (NGOs)  about  suspected  IUU  fishing 
activities in various parts of the world. It also pursues a regular dialogue with NGOs on 
issues to do with IUU fishing. 

NGOs  also  play  an  important  role  in  combating  IUU.  They  carry  out  a  variety  of 
initiatives  designed  to  help  countries  covered  by  IUU  dialogues  with  their  adjustment 
efforts. For instance, they help identify challenges and possible solutions. Their advocacy 
is  instrumental  in  influencing  the  behaviour  of  operators  and  consumer  choices. 
Moreover, NGOs provide useful information on suspected IUU fishing activities, which 
the Commission follows up as appropriate. 

 3. Main challenges in implementing the IUU Regulation 

3.1 

Implementation within the EU 

As long as measures and sanctions for serious infringements differ among flag Member 
States that interpret enforcement rules in different ways, a completely level playing field 
in  the  EU  will  remain  out  of  reach.  To  address  this,  the  Commission  proposal  for  the 
revision  of  the  EU  fisheries  control  system  clarifies,  strengthenes  and  harmonises  the 
enforcement provisions currently set out in both the current Control Regulation and the 
IUU Regulation. It will be important to reach a co-legislators’ agreement that safeguards 
this objective. 

In the same vein, this revision needs to establish the legal basis for the compulsory use of 
the digital catch certificate (CATCH) in order to maximise the scheme’s efficiency. At a 
more technical level, its interoperability with other IT environments within the EU (e.g. 
to enable electronic certificates to be exchanged among all EU customs administrations – 
CERTEX),  as  well  as  with  the  IT  fisheries  control  environments  of  non-EU  countries 

37 
Using  information  supplied  by  EU  NAVFOR,  the  Commission  analyses  and  transmits  to  the  Indian 
Ocean  Tuna  Commission sightings and aerial imagery  footage of vessels that may be engaged in  fishing and 
fishing-related activities, especially activities that could be considered as violating the applicable conservation 
and management rules. 

13 

 
 
                                                           
needs to be secured, preferably through a single solution38. CERTEX could help facilitate 
interagency cooperation and crosschecks on imports.  

  Dialogues with non-EU countries 

The  main  challenge,  frequently  encountered  in  implementing  the  IUU  Regulation  with 
regard to non-countries, is to garner enough political will to revise legal frameworks and 
align  them  with  the  relevant  international  obligations.  In  this  context,  determining 
deterrent, proportionate and immediate measures and sanctions to ensure that offenders 
do not profit from IUU fishing activities is crucial. 

Once the legal framework is in place, the main challenge is to implement it effectively 
and proactively. This calls for time, resources, will, skills and expertise. There is thus a 
need  to  bring  in  technical  assistance  and  financial  support,  provided  by  specialised 
agencies. Funding of such capacity building should be coordinated to avoid unnecessary 
duplication  of  efforts.  In  this  regard,  experience  shows  there  is  a  need  for  public 
attorneys,  judges  and  other  legal  staff  to  learn  more  about  the  specific  features  of 
fisheries  legislation,  as  well  as  of  the  associated  monitoring,  control  and  surveillance 
(MCS)  obligations.  Capacity  building  provided  by  the  specialised  agencies  of  United 
Nations  organisations  such  as  the  FAO,  UNODC  or  INTERPOL  offers  a  unique 
opportunity to ensure that offenders are deprived of the benefits of their illegal activities. 

Another  challenge,  applicable  to  a  longer  time  span,  is  to  avoid  recidivism.  Sustaining 
the necessary political will is the main objective to be pursued here. 

  Strengthening the international governance to tackle IUU fishing  

Continued  ratification  and  effective  and  complete  implementation  of  the  PSMA  by  all 
the parties will be one of the main challenges over the next few years. The EU is to host 
the  Third  Meeting  of  the  Parties  to  the  PSMA  in  Brussels.  This  very  important 
multilateral  meeting  will  be  the  first  ever  opportunity  to  review  and  assess  the 
Agreement’s effectiveness. On this occasion, the FAO will also present the state of play 
on  the  development  of  a  Global  Information  Exchange  System  (GIES)  to  facilitate 
information  exchanges  on  port  denial  and  inspection  results  between  parties  to  the 
agreement.  Once  again,  IT  developments  will  constitute  both  an  opportunity  and  a 
challenge as regards interoperability with other IT frameworks. 

In the RFMO context, the challenge is to reach a consensus on anti-IUU measures among 
contracting  parties,  particularly  as  regards  the  cross-listing  of  IUU  vessels  among 
RFMOs,  the  development  of  provisions  against  nationals  involved  in  IUU  fishing,  and 
more transparent rules on beneficial ownership of vessels. 

Another major challenge arises from flag States ‘selling’ their flags to non-EU countries’ 
operators. These states, whose flags are often referred to as ‘flags of convenience’, often 
fail  to  exercise  jurisdiction  or  effective  control  over  the  vessels  registered  under  their 

38 
doing important work to explore the possibility of using the FLUX format in this context. 

UN/CEFACT (the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business) is currently 

14 

 
 
                                                           
flag.  The  challenge  is  to  ensure  that  such  countries  abide  by  their  flag  States 
responsibilities  under  international  law  in  relation  to  fisheries,  and  that  they  guarantee 
improved  interagency  cooperation  between  fisheries  control  authorities  and  the 
authorities  responsible  for  registering  fishing  vessels  (including  refrigerated  transport 
vessels and supply vessels). 

Transparency is key to ensuring better control and deterring possible IUU fishing. More 
information  on  the  applicable  rules  and  the  vessels  concerned  needs  to  be  made 
publically available. All countries are required to publish national legislation relevant to 
the management and conservation of their resources and to the conditions governing the 
activities of fishing vessels operating under their flag and vessels from non-EU countries 
that  carry  out  fishing  activities  in  their  waters  (including  public  fleet  registers,  fishing 
licences  and  authorisations  and  participating  in  the  FAO  Global  Record  of  Fishing 
Vessels, Refrigerated Transport Vessels and Supply Vessels). More transparent fisheries 
access agreements are needed, like those characteristic of the EU’s sustainable fisheries 
partnership agreements (SFPAs)39. 

  Cooperation and coordination  

Breaches  of  human  rights  and  labour  rights  in  the  fisheries  sector  are  often  associated 
with  IUU  fishing.  Applying  the  IUU  Regulation  can  help  uncover  such  abuses. 
Moreover, experience shows that improved fisheries control structures and tools have led 
to  improvements  in  tackling  human  and  labour  rights  abuses.  However,  the  IUU 
Regulation is not in itself the right tool for tackling such breaches, its scope being clearly 
limited to IUU fishing as defined in international law. These wider challenges therefore 
require a different and appropriate legal framework. 

Anti-IUU fishing policy increasingly interacts with labour, customs, trade and transport 
policies, sanitary requirements, repression of fraud and criminal acts like tax evasion or 
money  laundering.  Stronger  internal  coordination  (among  different  Commission 
departments and with the EEAS) has helped the Commission create synergies and gain in 
effectiveness.  These  efforts  must  continue,  but  there  is  a  further  challenge:  to  ensure 
appropriate channels for cooperation and coordination at international level. Inter-agency 
cooperation at Member State level should also be further encouraged. 

 4. Conclusions 

The IUU Regulation has continued to provide a comprehensive and effective framework for 
combating  IUU  fishing  within  the  EU.  It  is  a  unique  system:  on  the  one  hand,  it  prevents 
products  originating  from  IUU  fishing  from  entering  the  EU  market;  on  the  other,  the 
dialogues with non-EU countries multiply efforts to combat IUU fishing worldwide. 

The carding system under the IUU Regulation has become an internationally recognised tool 
for  progress  in  combating  IUU  fishing  and  attracting  more  attention  to  this  scourge 
worldwide.  It  owes  its  success  partly  to  the  fact  that  the  system  created  by  the  IUU 
Regulation  does  not  impose  any  EU  standards  on  non-EU  countries.  Instead,  it  simply 

39 
partners publicly available and to applying non-discrimination principles. 

SFPAs  signed  by  the  EU  commit  partner  countries  to  making  their  bilateral  agreements  with  other 

15 

 
 
                                                           
ensures  that  they  abide  by  their  commitments  under  international  law,  as  flag,  port,  coastal 
and market States. 

To achieve SDG target 14.4, eliminate IUU fishing and live up to our commitments under the 
European Green Deal, it is in the EU’s interest to promote both the catch certification scheme 
and the carding system worldwide, as strong tools in the fight against IUU fishing. This needs 
to  be  accompanied  by  efforts  to  close  governance  gaps  at  regional  and  global  levels  and 
increase the capacity of non-EU countries to fight IUU fishing. 

To  further  improve  the  capacity  of  the  IUU  Regulation  and  the  EU  framework  to  counter, 
combat  and  eliminate  IUU  fishing,  it  is  important  to  adopt  and  implement  the  revised  EU 
fisheries  control  system  swiftly.  This  includes  the  digitalisation  of  the  catch  certification 
scheme.  

16