11.07.2015 Views

Implementation of IPOA/IUU - International MCS Network

Implementation of IPOA/IUU - International MCS Network

Implementation of IPOA/IUU - International MCS Network

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

588.3 Possibilities for Further ActionParagraph 80 <strong>of</strong> the <strong>IPOA</strong>-<strong>IUU</strong> suggests a number <strong>of</strong> ways in whichStates, acting through RFMOs, can do more to prevent, deter and eliminate <strong>IUU</strong>fishing. The following material reviews these suggestions in further detail.8.3.1 Institutional StrengtheningAt the most basic level, members <strong>of</strong> RFMOs should ensure that theRFMOs as institutions have the resources necessary to carry out their assignedfunctions. This entails, among other things, the adoption <strong>of</strong> realistic budgets andthe prompt payment <strong>of</strong> assessed contributions.Institutional strengthening must take place on a broader level as well.The <strong>IPOA</strong>-<strong>IUU</strong> reaffirms that States have a duty to cooperate with RFMOs andthat they should give effect to that duty either by becoming members <strong>of</strong> RFMOsor at least by ensuring that their vessels do not undermine measures adopted byRFMOs. 116 In turn, RFMOs should encourage non-members with a real interestin the fishery concerned to become members or should at least develop ways t<strong>of</strong>acilitate cooperation by non-members in the work <strong>of</strong> RFMOs. 117On the basis <strong>of</strong> these concepts, many RFMOs could strengthen theirinstitutional regimes to deal with <strong>IUU</strong> fishing by creating more positive bases forinteracting with non-members. As noted above, RFMOs are increasingly invitingnon-members to become members or at least to attain “cooperating” status. 118These trends should be continued, as RFMOs cannot hope to manage fisherieseffectively if vessels <strong>of</strong> non-members participate in the fisheries without regardfor the measures adopted by the RFMO.For those States that are not yet willing to join RFMOs (or for thoseentities not eligible to join), “cooperating” status can provide a flexiblearrangement that can reduce the possibility <strong>of</strong> <strong>IUU</strong> fishing and enhance theintegrity <strong>of</strong> RFMOs overall. Although the terms and conditions <strong>of</strong> “cooperating”status can be tailored to fit the particular circumstances <strong>of</strong> a given RFMO, thebasic idea is to create an understanding along the following lines. Those granted“cooperating” status by a RFMO would agree to abide by the basic conservation116 See paragraph 79 <strong>of</strong> the <strong>IPOA</strong>-<strong>IUU</strong>. This provision is drawn in part from article 8(3) <strong>of</strong>the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.117 See paragraph 83 <strong>of</strong> the <strong>IPOA</strong>-<strong>IUU</strong>. This provision is also drawn in part from article8(3) <strong>of</strong> the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.118 See, e.g. GFCM Resolution 97/2, adopted at its Twenty-second Session; ICCATResolution 94-6 on Coordination with Non-Contracting Parties, and ICCAT Resolution97-17 on Becoming a Cooperation Party, Entity or Fishing Entity; Resolution <strong>of</strong> the IOTCConcerning Cooperation with Non-Contracting Parties (Annex M to the Report <strong>of</strong> theThird Session <strong>of</strong> IOTC).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!