Commission for the Conservation and ... - Site de la pêche

for the Secretariat to require data for all of the RFV data fields for the initial placement on the
RFV.
205. WCPFC6 approved the amendment to CMM 2004-01 contained in WCPFC6-
2009/DP10 clarifying that flag States are responsible for ensuring that their vessels are on
the RFV prior to commencing operations in the WCPFC Convention Area.
b. CMM 2005-03 North Pacific albacore
206. The NC Chair presented a proposal to revise CMM 2005-03 on North Pacific albacore
(WCPFC-2009/DP06). The NC Chair acknowledged the concerns of FFA members regarding the
authority of the NC for the Convention Area north of 20 o north latitude only, but highlighted the
importance of a CMM that covered the entire distribution of the stock, which in the case of North
Pacific albacore extends to the equator. It was noted that IATTC has in place a similar measure
that covers all of its Convention Area north of the equator. The NC Chair proposed that the
Commission adopt the proposed CMM under its mandate to manage stocks in the Convention
Area over their entire range.
207. FFA members stated they could not support the measure because it exceeded the area of
competence of the NC, and consultation within the Commission had been insufficient to generate
the required understanding of the proposal among non-NC members.
208. Several CCMs, while noting that the proposal covered an area for which the Commission,
rather than the NC, was responsible (i.e. 0–20 o N), stated that they would be comfortable with a
Commission decision to support the proposed CMM because it is important to cover the entire
range of the stock.
209. After subsequent discussion in the margins of WPCFC6, there appeared to be consensus
support for the application of the measure north of 20 o degrees north latitude, but not in waters
between the equator and 20 o N.
210. WCPFC6 agreed to postpone further consideration of the measure until next year.
c. CMM 2005-03 IUU listing procedures
211. Tonga, on behalf of FFA members, presented WCPFC6-2009/DP11, which contained a
proposal to amend CMM 2007-03, para. 15. The intent of the amendment is to require that
sanctions for IUU fishing violations that occur in national waters be resolved to the satisfaction of
the coastal State in whose waters they occurred. The amendment thus makes separate provisions
for violations that occur in national waters and those that occur on the high seas.
212. Some CCMs did not support the amendment because, according to their interpretation,
international law requires that sanctions be imposed by the flag State. These CCMs considered
that the cooperation of the flag State is an important element of deterring IUU fishing.
213. Some of these CCMs noted that flag State penalties will vary according to their national
legal systems, and this context needed to be appreciated when considering whether the penalty
was of adequate severity.
214. One CCM suggested that the proposed amendment to CMM 2007-03 be modified to
include the requirement that penalties imposed by the coastal State not be discriminatory.
27