APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A

AGENDA

OPENING OF THE WORKSHOP

BACKGROUND TO THE 1995 FAO CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHERIES AND THE 2001 FAO INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION TO PREVENT, DETER AND ELIMINATE ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE IPOA-IUU AND THE TECHNICAL GUIDELINE IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IPOA-IUU

PRESENTATION OF THE CASE STUDIES ON THE NPOAs-IUU

PROBLEM-SOLVING: MAKING RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS ABOUT IUU FISHING

REGIONAL FISHERIES ISSUES, WAYS OF IMPROVING COLLABORATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF FISHERIES PRIORITIES

FORMATION AND REPORTS OF THE WORKING GROUPS

• Formation of the Working Groups
• Reports of the Working Groups

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS BY THE WORKSHOP FACILITATOR AND PROPOSED FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS

• General Observations
• Proposed Follow-up Action

CLOSURE OF THE WORKSHOP

APPENDIX B

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

WORKSHOP FACILATOR

MICHAUD Philippe
Adviser
Seychelles Fishing Authority
PO Box 506
Mahe
Seychelles
Tel: +248 670300
Fax: +248 224508
Email: [email protected]

PARTICIPANTS

ABEGAZ Hussen
Senior Fishery Expert
Animal and Fisheries Resources
Development and Regulatory Department
Ministry of Agriculture
PO Box 62347
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: +251 1 155517
Fax: +251 1 512984/515360
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

ALI MOHAMED Youssouf
Directeur Général Adjoint
Ministère du développement chargé de la Pêche
BP 41
Moroni
Comores
Tel: +269 735630
Fax: +269 735630
Email: [email protected]

ANDRIAMISEZA Olga (Ms)
Chief
Service of Industrial Fisheries
BP 1699 Antananarivo
Madagascar
Tel: +261 202240650
Email: [email protected]

ANDRIANTSOA Mamy Hyacinthe
Directeur des pêches
Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Elevage et de la Pêche
BP 1699 Antananrivo
Madagascar
Tel/Fax: +261 202240900
Email: [email protected]

BOMBA Francisco Victor Agostinho
Deputy Director of Fisheries Administration
Ministry of Fisheries
CP 1723
Maputo
Mozambique
Tel: 300961
Email: [email protected]

GAMMAM Saleh
Industrial Liaison Director
Ministry of Fisheries
PO Box 27
Massawa
Eritrea
Tel: 552935

ANDOM Ghebretensae
Director-General
Fishery Resource Regulatory
Service
PO Box 27
Massawa
Eritrea
Tel: +291 1 552935
Fax: +291 1 552177

IRUNGU Edward Mwangi
Deputy Secretary
Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries
PO Box 34188
Kilimo House, Cathedral Road
6^th Floor
Nairobi
Kenya
Tel: +254 20 2718870
Fax: +254 20 316731
Email: [email protected]

JEHANGEER Mohammud Ismet
Principal Fisheries Officer
Ministry of Fisheries
4^th Level
LICI Building
John Kennedy Street
Port Louis
Mauritius
Tel: +230 2118703
Fax: +230 2081929
Email: [email protected]

KACHINJIKA Orton Malion
Chief Fisheries Officer
Department of Fisheries
PO Box 593
Lilongwe
Malawi
Tel: +265 01788511
Fax: +265 01788712
Email: [email protected]

KANYARU Roger
Directeur
Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage
BP 6308
Bujumbura
Burundi
Tel: +257 226378
Fax: +257 212820
Email: [email protected]

KAPASA Cyprian K.
Deptuty Director
Fisheries Research Branch
PO Box 350100
Chilanga
Zambia
Tel: +260 01278597
Email: [email protected]

KARIUKI Johnson Wainaina
Assistant Director of Fisheries
Fisheries Department
PO Box 58187
00100 Nairobi
Kenya
Tel: +254 20 3742320/49
Fax: +254 20 3743699/4530
Email: [email protected]

KIYUKU Antoine
Conseiller
Ministère de l’agriculture et de l’élevage
BP 335
Bujumbura
Burundi
Tel: +257 928134
Email: [email protected]

MABUNDA Abel
Chief for Fisheries Administration Department
Ministry of Fisheries
PO Box 1723
Maputo, Mozambique
Tel: +258 01 300561/04 214232
Fax: +258 01 325087

MAGAGULA Freddy
Fisheries Officer
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
PO Box 162
Mbabane
Swaziland
Tel: +268 4042731/9 (Ext. 2194)
Cell: +268 6072195
Fax: +268 4044700
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

MAGUSWI Charles T.
Deputy Director
Fisheries Management and Extension Branch
Department of Fisheries
PO Box 350100
Chilanga
Zambia
Tel: +260 97778447
Fax: +260 1278618
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

MANASE Moffat Mzama
Acting Head of Capture Fisheries Research
Fisheries Research Institute
PO Box 27 - Monkey Bay
Malawi
Tel: +265 01587249/01587360
Cell: +265 08 303792
Fax: +265 01587249
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

MHLANGA Wilson
Acting Officer-in-Charge
Lake Kariba Fisheries Research Institute
Private Bag 2075
Kariba
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 61 2936/7
Fax: +263 61 2938
Cell: +263 91 236104
Email: [email protected]

MMOPELWA Trevor G.
Principal Scientific Officer (Fisheries)
Department of Wildlife and National Parks
Fisheries Division
Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism
PO Box 131
Gaborone
Botswana
Tel: +267 3971405 (Ext. 2010)
Fax: +267 3180775
Email: [email protected]

MSIBI Johannes Mandla
Assistant Fisheries Officer
Fisheries Section
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
PO Box 162
Mbabane
Swaziland
Tel: +268 6132289
Fax: +268 4044700

MWERA Paul
Technical Officer
Lake Harvest Aquaculture
PO Box 322
Kariba
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 61 3201-3
Email: [email protected]

NADIOPE Eric
Senior Fisheries Inspector (Regulation)
Department of Fisheries Resources
PO Box 4
Entebbe
Uganda
Tel: 077931942
Email: [email protected]

NENGU Shaft Mbuso
Senior Scientific Officer
Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism
PO Box 70
Maun
Botswana
Tel: +267 6863935
Fax: +267 6860315
Email: [email protected]

NGWARAI Kenneth
Regional Warden
Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management
Authority
Private Bag 7713
Chinhoy
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 67 22550
Fax: +263 67 25676
Email: [email protected]

NICHOLS Paul
Special Adviser to the Minister
Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources
Private Bag 13355
Windhoek
Namibia
Tel: +264 61 2053080
Fax: +264 61 233286
Email: [email protected]

NORCHE Feta Zeberga
Senior Policy Planning Expert
Ministry of Agriculture
PO Box 62877
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
Tel: +251 1 516150
Fax: +251 1 515360
Email: [email protected]

OLYEL Daisy Aciro (Ms)
Senior Fisheries Inspector (Regulation)
Department of Fisheries Resources
Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries
PO Box 102 (or PO Box 4)
Entebbe
Uganda
Tel: 077636438
Email: [email protected]

PAYET Rondolph
Managing Director
Seychelles Fishing Authority
PO Box 449
Mahe
Seychelles
Tel: +248 714874/670312
Fax: +248 224508
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

RAMCHARRUN Boodhun
Divisional Scientific Officer (Fisheries)
Ministry of Fisheries
4^th Level - LIC Building
John Kennedy Street
Port Louis
Mauritius
Tel: +230 2088093
Fax: +230 2087998
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

SCHIVUTE Peter Katso
Chief Control Fisheries Officer
Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources
PO Box 1594
Walvis Bay 9000
Namibia
Tel: +264 64 2016111 (Ext. 201)
Fax: +264 64 2005
Email: [email protected]

WILLIAMS James
Chef
Service Régional de la Pêche
Ministère de la Production
BP 330 Mutsamudu
Anjouan
Comores
Tel: +269 710176
Fax: +269 710176
Email: [email protected]

OBSERVER

MATIPA Rabson
Consultant
Common Market for Eastern and Southern
Africa
PO Box 30051
Lusaka
Zambia
Tel: +260 1 229725/32
Fax: +260 1 225107
Email: [email protected]

FAO

SEKITOLEKO Victoria (Ms)
Subregional Representative for Southern and East Africa
Subregional Office for Southern and East Africa
PO Box 3730
Harare
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 4 253 657
Fax: +263 4 700 724
Email: [email protected]

DOULMAN David
Senior Fishery Liaison Officer
Fishery Policy and Planning Division
FAO Fisheries Department
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome
Italy
Tel: +39 0657056752
Fax: +39 0657056500
Email: [email protected]

HARRIS Aubrey
Senior Fisheries Officer
Subregional Office for Southern and East Africa
PO Box 3730
Harare
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 4 253 657 ext. 212
Fax: +263 4 700 724
Email: [email protected]

SSENTONGO George William
Fisheries Liaison Officer
Subregional Office for Southern and East Africa
PO Box 3730
Harare
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 4 253655/7
Fax: +263 4 700724
Email: [email protected]

GUYONNET Marianne (Ms)
Secretary
Fishery Policy and Planning Division
FAO Fisheries Department
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome, Italy
Tel: +39 0657053951
Fax: +39 0657056500
Email: [email protected]

CHAGONDA Grace (Ms)
Programme Assistant
FAO Subregional Office for Southern Africa
PO Box 3730
Harare
Zimbabwe
Tel: +263 4 791407/791420/791481/
253693 (Ext. 243)
Fax: +263 4 700724/703497
Email: [email protected]

APPENDIX C

DOCUMENTATION PRESENTED

· Agenda

· 2001 FAO International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing: Background and Progress towards Implementation. David J. Doulman, FAO Fisheries Department. Rome, Italy.

APPENDIX D

OPENING STATEMENT
by
Ms Victoria Sekitoleko
FAO Subregional Representative for Southern and East Africa
Harare, Zimbabwe

Dear participants,

Welcome to the FAO workshop on the elaboration of National plans of Action to combat of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing.

You have come from the far reaches of this continent to discuss and work on this subject to find ways of combating IUU.

Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing is an aspect that pervades many countries of the subregion. It prevents the proper management of an important sustainable natural resource, fish. At the local scale, it can produce overfishing where the natural ability of the system to produce at its optimum is significantly impaired. This in turn results in lost economic and social opportunities. At regional level, as we all know, all the water bodies are interlinked, so the effect will spread.

And finally, at the broader scale, Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing prevents the countries of the subregion from deriving the due benefits from their territorial waters and exclusive economic zones.

Most of you are from Africa, so it will be of no surprise when I say to you that we should be always clear as to the goals of all our actions. Our actions have to aim at the establishment and maintenance of food secure nations where increased opportunities exist for the people to have a reasonable and dependable livelihood within the natural resources, and specifically the fisheries sector.

In this respect I appeal to you to make your voices heard in forums that determine the distribution of technical and financial resources for the continent. In FAO the main forum for fisheries is the Committee for Fisheries, which is held in Rome, every two years. You will need to properly brief your Ministers and representatives so that the fisheries priorities of the region are well represented in the deliberations of this committee.

On this continent, there will always be many players, for example, the Southern African region has several economic organisations such as SADC, COMESA, COI and well as initiatives across the continent espoused within NEPAD. Apart from the FAO, which is the UN Organization with the prime mandate in Fisheries, there are other UN Agencies, partners and donors, NGOs and the business community with interests in the fisheries sector. All these mechanisms should be used to the greatest extent possible to achieve the goals of food security and economic development.

We should, of course, always be vigilant and aware of all the related issues.

Since the late 1980’s and particularly during the 1990s, it has become evident that wild fish stocks, accessible to Southern and East African fisherfolk, are increasingly reaching a state of full exploitation. There are a few countries that have potential for significant increases in the total harvest of fish but for most countries only minimal increases can occur.

Also in the last three or four decades, an important component of African fish stocks have been exploited by non-African enterprises often based outside the continent while the overwhelming majority of Africa’s fishers have been engaged in near-shore or canoe based fisheries. The development of capital intensive African industrial fisheries has been limited largely in this subregion to South Africa and Namibia.

In the new century, policies and strategies must be revised and emphasis placed on a combination of (i) control and containment of capture fisheries; (ii) encouragement and expansion of the aquaculture sector; and, (iii) increasing value added in all fish products.

The expansion of aquaculture and value-adding of fish products are both aspects that I personally attach much importance to. In fact, I hope that during this workshop you will have the opportunity to visit one of the largest cage-culture operations in Africa.

However, coming back to capture fisheries, improved governance will be the foundation for control and containment of the capture fisheries sector.

In order to improve governance countries will need to ensure: (i) a fisheries juridical system; and (ii) a fisheries management system. The fisheries management system must include a system for monitoring, control and surveillance. This in turn will increasingly make use of satellite based vessel monitoring systems (VMS) to facilitate the control of industrial fishing vessels as well as smaller fishing vessels.

Importantly, there will be need to make greater use of and obtain increased benefits from national exclusive economic zones not only through these monitoring systems but also through greater localisation of processing and fishing effort currently undertaken by foreign fishing fleets.

These issues of governance, fisheries management, monitoring control and surveillance are issues that you will have to deal with in the development of National plans of Action for Combating Illegal Unregulated and Unreported fishing.

I understand that the workshop is structured so that on leaving here, participants can expect to have:

• a raised awareness of the deletrious impacts of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing and the need for concerted and decisive national action

• a comprehensive understanding of the related International Plans of Action and their relationships with other international fisheries instruments

• a clearer definition of the steps your country can take to address the illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing issue

• and a shared understanding how by acting in the subregional context, these steps can be easier and more effective.

In conclusion, I believe that your activities this week should help provide skills and knowledge that will benefit your countries in addressing the larger fisheries issues of this decade. I wish you a successful workshop where you work hard, contribute and learn a lot, but also take time to enjoy these beautiful Lake surroundings.

I have great pleasure in declaring this workshop open.

APPENDIX E

2001 FAO INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION TO PREVENT, DETER AND ELIMINATE ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING: BACKGROUND AND PROGRESS TOWARDS IMPLEMENTATION ^[2]

INTRODUCTION

The international community has identified illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing to be a major impediment to the achievement of long-term sustainable fisheries as called for, inter alia, in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21,^[3] the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries,^[4] the UN Millennium Development Goals^[5] and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation.^[6] This is because the activities of IUU fishers undermine national and regional efforts to implement management measures that are designed to promote responsible fisheries. This is an especially grave situation given that FAO in 2002 estimated that some 75 percent of world fisheries are already being fully exploited, overexploited or depleted.^[7]

IUU fishing is virtually a universal fishing problem that occurs in marine and inland capture fisheries. Despite common misunderstandings about IUU fishing, it is not confined to any particular group of fishers, though experience shows that IUU fishing is widely practised in those fisheries - both within exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and on the high seas - where the prospects for apprehension are lowest and by fishers that operate vessels that are not subject to effective flag State control. This means that many countries, because of their limited means to implement effective measures in their EEZs to regulate legitimate and illegitimate fishing activities, are subject to re-occurring IUU fishing by both national and foreign fleets.

The work of some regional fishery management organizations or arrangements (RFMOs), which are the cornerstones for the promotion of international cooperation in fisheries management, report that IUU fishing in their convention areas by both member and non-member flag vessels is widespread and handicaps their efforts to rationally manage fisheries. This is critical because if RFMOs are not in a position to fulfil their mandates with respect to management, the outlook for the sustainable utilization of many of the world’s commercially important fish stocks is bleak.

The international community further recognizes that IUU fishing is symptomatic of other problems facing the fisheries sector. These problems need to be resolved in a timely manner if IUU fishing is to be prevented, deterred and eliminated. These problems include, inter alia:

• ineffective fisheries management that fails to regulate fishery inputs and outputs;

• excess fleet capacity in some fisheries and the "pushing out" and re-flagging of vessels from managed fisheries as regulations tighten in these fisheries to other fisheries that are unmanaged or poorly managed. Often this process involves a migration of displaced fleet capacity^[8];

• masking of the real economic costs of vessel construction and fishing operations through the payment of fisheries-related subsidies; and

• consistent failure by many countries, and in particular some countries that operate open registries for fishing vessels, to meet their international obligations with respect to the control of fishing vessels flying their flags.

There are no global data on the full extent and cost of IUU fishing. The nature of this type of fishing does not readily permit global estimation with any significant degree of confidence. However, some RFMOs are working to assess the regional extent and impacts of IUU fishing. In one case, for example, it is estimated by an RFMO that catches of one commercially-valuable species could be exceeding permitted catch levels by nearly 300 percent.

As a consequence of RFMO assessments of the scope and effects of IUU fishing, it should be possible to:

• consolidate a broader, though incomplete, perspective on IUU fishing across regions; and

• determine more accurately how such fishing is hindering RFMOs from fulfilling their mandates and achieving more responsible fisheries.

It is acknowledged that the implementation of measures by RFMOs to combat IUU fishing are only as effective as their members permit them to be because RFMOs are not supra-national entities. A failure by RFMOs to effectively address IUU fishing reflects, to some degree, a lack of political will^[9] by their members to take concerted and calculated steps to control fishing vessels that engage in activities that undermine the work of RFMOs and thereby render their fisheries management efforts sub-optimal.^[10]

A further serious and moral consideration relating to IUU fishing is that such fishing is contributing to food insecurity in some coastal and inland fishing communities that are heavily dependent on fish for food and revenue derived from the sale of fishing licences and from fish exports. While this is not a recent phenomenon in some regions, information available to FAO from country reports and discussions in fora such as the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) indicates that the incidence and depth of IUU fishing is increasing, sometimes at the expense of impoverished small-scale fishers.

It has also been noted by some countries that IUU fishing seriously prejudices the interests of commercial fishers who abide by their national and regional authorizations to fish.^[11] This occurs because IUU fishers do not face the same constraints in terms of operating costs, catch limits, etc, nor do IUU fishers implement the same safety standards for fishing and support vessels and crews as is required by their counterparts who do not engage in IUU fishing.

INTERNATIONAL ACTION TO COMBAT IUU FISHING

FAO has been at the forefront of international efforts and action to address IUU fishing. The Rome Declaration on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries^[12] states, inter alia, that countries would develop a global plan of action to deal effectively with all forms of IUU fishing including fishing vessels flying "flags of convenience". This seminal Declaration set the international stage for efforts to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing and provided the impetus and framework for FAO to pursue a structured suite of activities relating to the elaboration of an IPOA-IUU. From 1999 onwards, Sessions of the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) and the FAO Council have discussed and reviewed developments concerning IUU fishing, culminating in the endorsement of the IPOA-IUU by the Hundred and Twentieth Session of the FAO Council in June 2001.

Following the adoption of the Rome Declaration on Responsible Fisheries and the IPOA-IUU, growing international concern about IUU fishing led the issue to be addressed by United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Indeed, IUU fishing has been considered each year since 2000 in UNGA resolutions.^[13] These resolutions have, inter alia:

• condemned IUU fishing in all its forms;

• called on States to implement full and effective flag State control over vessels flying their flags;

• encouraged bilateral and regional cooperation to combat IUU fishing;

• urged States to address IUU fishing and to implement the 2001 FAO International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IPOA-IUU) though the elaboration of national plans of action (NPOAs) by 2004, as called for in the IPOA-IUU; and

• encouraged the implementation of effective monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) and vessel monitoring systems (VMS) as a means of combating IUU fishing.

Within the ambit of the UNGA, IUU fishing has also been reviewed by all sessions of the United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (UNICPOLOS) since its inception in 2000. The reports of these meetings, which are forwarded annually to the UNGA for consideration, have noted, inter alia:

• IUU fishing presents an urgent and serious challenge to the international community if sustainable fisheries are to be achieved;

• the necessity to secure a global consensus on reversing declines in fish stocks and taking coordinated steps to address overfishing and the continuing problem of IUU fishing;

• the significance of FAO’s work in elaborating and promoting the implementation of the IPOA-IUU;

• the requirement for all States and RFMOs to take action to implement the IPOA-IUU;

• the need for effective flag State control if IUU fishing is to be combated;

• the importance of further examining and clarifying the role of the ‘genuine link’ in relation to the duty of flag States to exercise control over vessels flying their flags; and

• the role of port States in preventing, deterring and eliminating IUU fishing and encouraged FAO to continue its work in promoting port State measures to combat IUU fishing.

With a sharp focus on fisheries issues and the need to secure sustainable outcomes in the fisheries sector as promulgated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED),^[14] the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) addressed, inter alia, the scope and effects of IUU fishing. The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, which also reflects certain decisions adopted by COFI, called for States to implement the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and its related IPOAs and guidelines. Significantly, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation^[15] urges that States implement by 2004 national and, where appropriate, regional plans of action to give effect to the IPOA-IUU.

Furthermore, to enhance the implementation of the IPOA-IUU and to reduce the incidence of IUU fishing and fishing fleet overcapacity, the Johannesburg Plan of Action urged States to establish effective MCS systems for fishing vessels, including by flag States and to eliminate subsidies paid to the fishing industry that contribute to IUU fishing.

At the regional level, as noted above, many RFMOs and other organizations that do not have specific fisheries management functions are directing attention to IUU fishing. In addition to keeping IUU fishing under review and heightening their Members’ awareness about the problem, some RFMOs and international organizations have discussed, made recommendations and passed resolutions on IUU fishing as a means of condemning and combating it. Some RFMOs, in their efforts to combat IUU fishing, have taken measures, inter alia, to:

• encourage non-Members to become parties to their organizations;

• implement new, and strengthen existing, policies, procedures and mandates;^[16]

• develop black or white lists of vessels with a view to gaining the greater cooperation of flag States;

• implement catch certification and traceability controls on catch so that the marketing of fish taken by fishers who are known to have engaged in IUU fishing will be made more difficult, if not blocked completely.

• RFMOs that have addressed IUU fishing, made recommendations or passed resolutions directed at preventing, deterring and eliminating IUU fishing include, inter-alia, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, and the Preparatory Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.^[17]

The need to address IUU fishing on all fronts and in all its forms continues to be a major focus of international attention. The international community acknowledges the gravity of such fishing and its environmental, economic and social consequences.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IPOA-IUU

IUU fishing flourishes primarily because many States fail to meet their obligations under international law with respect to flag State control. In a world where States exercised effective control over fishing vessels flying their flags the incidence of IUU fishing would be greatly reduced. However, States are not meeting their flag State obligations either because they are unable or unwilling to do so. This situation has necessitated that the international community look beyond conventional solutions to combat IUU fishing and adopt and implement a wider and more innovative suite of measures that are important secondary defences when flag States do not meet their international obligations. Indeed, this was one of the fundamental reasons why FAO Members opted to elaborate the IPOA-IUU.

The IPOA-IUU is a voluntary instrument concluded within the framework of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. The IPOA-IUU is a comprehensive instrument that may be viewed as a ‘toolbox’ whereby a State can ‘mix and match’ or ‘tailor’ measures contained in the IPOA to meet its particular IUU fishing needs and challenges. In a flexible way, and as appropriate, the IPOA-IUU urges that measures be taken by:

• all States (international instruments, national legislation, NPOAs, cooperation between States, publicity and technical capacity and resources);

• flag States (fishing vessel registration, records of fishing vessels and authorizations to fish), coastal States; and

• port States.

In addition, the IPOA-IUU addresses: internationally agreed market-related measures; research; the role of RFMOs in combating IUU fishing; the special requirements of developing countries; reporting on progress with the implementation of the IPOA-IUU; and the role of FAO.

In late 2002, many countries reported to FAO that IUU fishing impacts their efforts to achieve sustainable fisheries. Moreover, about one third of the FAO Membership stated that such fishing is problematic and is hampering their efforts to implement the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

In their reporting, Members advised FAO that IUU fishing occurs in both marine and freshwater capture fisheries, but that the extent and full impact of IUU fishing is not well known in all cases. In addition, Members reported on the types of IUU fishing being encountered in their fisheries. Such types of fishing include:

• unauthorized incursions into EEZs and inshore areas especially by foreign fishing vessels. Some Members noted that such incursions are adversely impacting production by small-scale fishers;

• unauthorized fishing in closed and restricted areas;

• incomplete catch and effort reporting by industrial fleets. The under-reporting of catches was identified as a significant problem;

• lack of compliance by fishers with the terms of their fishing authorization;

• use of banned fishing gears;

• fishing with explosives and poisons; and

• use of dams for the illegal netting of fish in inland fisheries.

In their efforts to curb IUU fishing, Members have taken measures to:^[18]

• strengthen the functions of RFMOs;

• accept and ratify international instruments such as the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement;

• strength policy and legislation to conform with the IPOA-IUU including provisions for tougher vessel licensing and the deregistration, decommissioning and scrapping of vessels that have engaged in IUU fishing;

• improve mechanisms to more effectively address flag State and port State responsibilities;

• implement measures to give greater control over nationals working on fishing vessels of any flag State;

• implement measures to against "flag of convenience vessels";

• impose higher penalties and imprisonment terms for IUU fishers;

• enhance MCS and the mandatory implementation of VMS;

• improve vessel observers’ programmes;

• seize and destroy catches resulting from IUU fishing so that fishers will not benefit from their illicit activities;

• seize and destroy fishing gear belonging to fishers when it is known that their vessels have engaged in IUU fishing;

• implement more comprehensive catch reporting;

• strengthen regional cooperation, through RFMOs, to reduce avenues for IUU fishing;

• introduce catch certification schemes to trace the origin of fish and prohibition of certain landings if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the fish has been taken by IUU fishers; and

• build awareness among stakeholders, including fishers’ associations, concerning the extent and detrimental effects of IUU fishing.

Forty-seven Members indicated to FAO that they had taken steps towards developing and implementing their NPOAs.^[19] Twenty-three Members indicated that they would finalize their NPOAs in the near future while a further 18 Members reported that their NPOAs would be completed before the 2004 deadline.^[20]

For monitoring and reporting on progress with the implementation of the IPOA-IUU, Members, RFMOs and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are invited to report to FAO every two years in the context of their reporting relating to the implementation of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. An analysis of the information provided by respondents is important in that it:

• enables FAO to assess and highlight difficulties being encountered by countries in their implementation efforts, and

• indicates priorities and development assistance needs so that donors might more effectively channel and target assistance to priority areas identified by countries.

Based on information available to FAO it is concluded that the rate at which IUU fishing NPOAs are being developed and implemented falls short of the desired pace necessary to effectively combat such fishing. Developing countries, in particular, are experiencing difficulties in complying with the implementation deadline because of a limited technical capacity and, in some cases, financial means.

In assessing progress towards the development and implementation of NPOAs to combat IUU fishing it should be noted that a period of three years, as specified in the IPOA-IUU, is a relatively limited timeframe within which to undertake the required background work, elaborate a draft NPOA, have it cleared through domestic processes and then commence implementation. It should also be recognized that since UNCED there have been a number of important international fishery instruments (including several that have been adopted in regions) that require considerable national assessment and in turn, implementation. This situation has led to "implementation overload", for both developing and developed countries. Taking a broader perspective on the implementation of all post-UNCED fishery instruments and the national burden associated with it, delays in implementation should be anticipated. Nonetheless, given the importance of IUU fishing and its effects on sustainability, every effort should be to combat such fishing as a matter of urgency.

CAPACITY BUILDING AND INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING TO COMBAT IUU FISHING

The serious effects of IUU fishing on responsible fisheries prompted countries, in adopting the Rome Declaration on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, to take action to elaborate an IPOA-IUU to deal effectively with such fishing. The elaboration and implementation of NPOAs, which give effect to the IPOA-IUU, presupposes that countries have the technical and financial means to do so. The IPOA-IUU recognizes^[21] the special requirements of developing countries, in particular the least development among them and small island developing States, in terms of the financial, technical and other assistance needed to meet their commitments under the IPOA-IUU and other obligations under international law.

The challenges presented by IUU fishing have generated bilateral and multilateral responses to assist developing countries enhance their capacities to address these challenges. Bilateral assistance, very often of a practical and ‘hands on’ nature, has been provided to countries in a number of key areas including, inter alia, MCS and VMS training, improving vessel boarding and inspection procedures, enhancing observer programmes, implementing catch documentation schemes and strengthening port inspection procedures. Multilateral cooperation is also growing, especially in MCS-related areas concerning the real-time sharing of information, through such initiatives as the International MCS Network. These bilateral or multilateral strategic initiatives are likely to be maintained, expanded and deepened through time as a means of enhancing national capacities in developing countries. It is anticipated that through time these initiatives will assist in closing weaker ‘links’ in the IUU fishing chain that IUU fishers seek to exploit.

FAO targets activities in developing countries so as to build capacity and strengthen institutions in promoting long-term sustainable fisheries. Information available to FAO concerning the implementation of the IPOA-IUU indicates that many developing Members are in need of technical assistance to enhance their capacities to elaborate and implement their NPOAs.

The IPOA-IUU proposes that FAO, in cooperation with relevant international financial institutions and mechanisms (IFIs), should assist developing countries implement the IPOA-IUU. The proposed FAO activities include the:

• review and revision of national legislation;

• improvement and harmonization of fisheries and related data collection;

• strengthening of regional institutions; and

• strengthening and enhancing of integrated MCS systems, including satellite vessels monitoring systems (VMS).

FAO has been providing assistance to developing countries in these four areas as part of its Regular Programme and trust-fund activities. FAO has:

• implemented a programme of assistance for developing countries to review and revise national fisheries and related legislation. Since 1995 this programme has also focussed on incorporating, as appropriate, the principles and requirements of post-UNCED fishery instruments into relevant fisheries laws.

• assisted developing countries upgrade their data collection, processing, reporting and harmonization capabilities.^[22] Technical assistance at national and regional levels is a significant component of FAO's Programme of Work and Budget involving both normative and field programme activities. Outputs of normative activities include technical documents on statistical methodology and guidelines for data collection. Field programme activities involve project formulation and implementation, technical backstopping and organization of training courses and workshops. FAO is also involved in the promotion of cost-effective and sustainable approaches and techniques for the collection of fishery statistical data.

• encouraged RFMOs to enhance their capacities to better fulfil their mandates and to this end has taken steps to encourage dialogue and collaboration between them. Where fisheries organizations do not have mandates to manage fish stocks, FAO fosters cooperation among their members with a view to stimulating and strengthening bilateral and regional fisheries activities; and

• promoted the implementation of MCS and VMS systems in countries through policy and practical training. Capacity building in this area stresses the central role of MCS in fisheries management and the different VMS systems that might be deployed. In some subregions agreement has been reached on the compatibility of national MCS and VMS systems. Such compatibility also requires that there be harmonized fisheries legislation and strengthened international cooperation through the exchange of real-time and other information.

The IPOA-IUU further calls on FAO to:

• collect information and data for further analysis aimed at identifying factors and causes contributing to IUU fishing;

• support the development of national and regional plans to combat IUU fishing;

• collaborate with international agencies and, in particular, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), to further investigate the issue of IUU fishing, in particular, by strengthening measures by port States;

• convene a consultation on the implementation of catch certification and documentation requirements; and

• investigate the benefits of establishing and maintaining global databases, including but not limited to, information provided for in Article VI (Exchange of Information) in the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement.

Since the FAO Council endorsement of the IPOA-IUU, FAO has undertaken, and is undertaking, activities designed to heighten international awareness about the scope and impact of IUU fishing, its adverse impacts on sustainable fisheries and the management efforts of RFMOs and as a means of supporting initiatives to combat such fishing. These activities include the:

• translation and wide dissemination of the IPOA-IUU;

• preparation, translation and wide distribution of comprehensive technical guidelines to support the implementation of the IPOA-IUU;

• preparation, translation and distribution of a simple language publication entitled "Stopping IUU Fishing";^[23]

• cooperation with RFMOs in convening an Expert Consultation of Regional Fishery Bodies on Harmonization Certification;^[24]

• convening an Expert Consultation to Review Port State Measures to Combat Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing.^[25] The documents from this Consultation will form the basis for follow-up in 2004 when an FAO Technical Consultation on Port State Measures to Combat Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing will be convened. It will address substantive issues relating to the role of the port State and, as appropriate, principles and guidelines for the establishment of regional memoranda of understanding on port State measures to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing;

• convening an Expert Consultation on Fishing Vessels Operating under Open Registries and their Impact on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, in cooperation with the Government of the United States of America;^[26]

• mounting regional workshops to assist developing countries elaborate NPOAs; and

• assisting developing countries, on a request basis, to assess national situations with respect to IUU fishing and the development of proposed courses of action to address it.

Recognizing the linkage between IUU fishing and fishing fleet overcapacity, FAO will convene a Technical Consultation to review progress with, and promote the full implementation of, the IPOA-IUU and the International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity.^[27]

A further and fertile area for work that might be initiated in countries as a means of combating IUU fishing is the development of dialogue and partnerships between governments and industry. Some countries are already focussing on such partnerships to encourage industry to assist in solving IUU fishing problems. This development is highly positive and should be encouraged.

As opportunities present themselves FAO also participates in international and national meetings to disseminate information about the implementation of the IPOA-IUU and the steps that countries should take to develop NPOAs and to combat IUU fishing. This is an important means of sensitizing stakeholders about their respective roles in the implementation process, forging and bolstering partnerships and promoting transparency.

CONCLUSION

IUU fishing occurs in all marine and inland capture fisheries. It is a severe problem in many fisheries because it undermines the capacity of national administrations and RFMOs to sustainably manage fisheries. It is for this reason that the international community has given high priority to combating IUU fishing wherever it occurs and in all of its forms.

FAO has taken a leading role in the international action to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing. At the request of its Members FAO in 2001 concluded an international plan of action to address such fishing. Since then IUU fishing and the need to effectively implement the IPOA-IUU has been considered by all major fishery meetings, RFMOs, the UNGA and WSSD.

The implementation of the IPOA-IUU requires that NPOAs-IUU be elaborated and put in place. This places an additional burden on fishery administrations and RFMOs, many of which are already suffering from "implementation fatigue". Significantly, the IPOA-IUU recognizes the need to assist developing countries meet the requirements of the international plan through its provisions relating to the special requirements of developing States.

IUU fishing is not a new phenomenon. It has plagued fisheries management and deprived resources owners of revenue for decades. However, the incidence of IUU fishing is increasing as:

• more fish stocks decline;

• tighter fisheries management arrangements are introduced;

• MCS and VMS are strengthened;

• more stringent port State control measures are introduced;

• countries move to enact measures relating to the control over nationals working on fishing vessels, irrespective of where the vessels are fishing or the flags they fly;

• RFMOs review their mandates pertaining to IUU fishing and its associated problems;

• countries and RFMOs start to develop listings of IUU fishing vessels and exchange more real time information (e.g. through the MCS International Network) on fishing infringements and the operation of rogue IUU fishing vessels; and

• prices for scarcer fish rise (e.g. cod, halibut etc).

These trends are unlikely to change in the near future. This means that IUU fishing will continue at levels that undermine efforts to implement responsible and sustainable fisheries practices. Vigilance and closer international cooperation is needed at all levels if IUU fishing is to be prevented, deterred and eliminated as foreseen in the IPOA-IUU.

APPENDIX F

OUTLINE OF THE ROLE PLAYING/PROBLEM SOLVING: MAKING RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS ABOUT IUU FISHING

PROBLEM: The foreign flagged vessel, "Galapagos Beauty", a 550 GRT stern trawler has been fishing for the last four days in the EEZ of the Republic of Zoro. The vessel is not authorized to fish in the EEZ. The vessel has been making good catches of pomp, cot and rouly, all of which are high valued species and have strong market demand in Europe and North America.

The Chief Fisheries Officer (CFO) in Angona, the capital of Zoro estimates that the vessel has taken 200 tonnes of these species in the four day period while operating in the country’s EEZ. His estimates are based on records of past catches, industry intelligence and photographs taken from the air while the vessel was hauling its net.

The vessel, according to its markings and flag which are clearly visible from the air, is registered in Camilla, a small island state in the Southern Ocean. Zoro’s CFO has contacted the Registry Manager in Camilla. He has advised that there is no record of this vessel on the registry.

Zoro’s medium-scale fishers who operate vessels of upto 200 GRT have protested to the Minister for Fisheries in Angona claiming that this larger foreign vessel is taking fish that they are legitimately authorized to catch. These fishers claim that the "Galapagos Beauty" is in fact flying more than one flag. Questions have been asked in parliament about what action the Government is taking to deal with this incursion. The Minister is under pressure to respond with a strong reply.

Zoro has a limited MCS capacity. It has only one small multi-purpose vessel that is used for MCS and search and rescue when and if required. However, the Government does have a light aircraft that it uses regularly to surveille the EEZ. It is used for fisheries, customs and search and rescue purposes. Zoro is a new member of the International MCS Network.

Intercepted radio conversations between the captain of the "Galapagos Beauty" and the vessel owner, who lives in Falu, have revealed that the fish will be offloaded in a neighbouring country in the port of Hella, 350 kms from Angona, in two days time. Apparently, the catch has been sold on a forward contract and is destined for transport to a national supermarket chain in Zetland.

Zoro is a member of the Oceanic Fisheries Commission which maintains information on IUU fishing activities submitted by members. The Commission also has a ‘blacklist’ of IUU fishing vessels.

MEASURES TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM: The Minister has called a meeting of officials and a representative from the fishing industry in his office. Those involved in the meeting, either in person or by telephone, are:

1. Minister
2. CFO
3. Representative from the Government Solicitor
4. Senior MCS Officer
5. President of the Fishers Association
6. Coordinator of the International MCS Network
7. Director of the Oceanic Fisheries Commission

ACTION: To develop a strategy to deal with the problem.

APPENDIX G

COMPOSITION OF THE WORKING GROUPS

WORKING GROUP 1 - Inland Fisheries

WORKING GROUP 2 - Inland Fisheries

WORKING GROUP 3 - EEZ Fisheries

WORKING GROUP 4 - EEZ Fisheries

WORKING GROUP 5 - High Seas Fisheries

APPENDIX H

REPORTS OF THE WORKING GROUPS

WORKING GROUP 1 - INLAND FISHERIES

1) Which Ministries/Departments are involved in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Ministries responsible for fisheries

  - Departments/division/section/unit of fisheries

• Ministry of Justice/Attorney General Chambers
• Ministry/department responsible for defense and/or security (i.e. police and defense)
• Ministry of Transport and communication
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Ministry responsible for local government and/or community development
• Ministry responsible for trade and industry
• Ministry responsible for water, environment and natural resources
• Ministries of Finance and Economic development
• Ministry/Department of parks and wildlife

2) What constraints are likely to be faced in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Lack/limited finance
• Limited institutional capacity

- Inadequate human resource
- Lack of expertise

• Low prioritization and/or marginalization of the fisheries sector
• Lack of public awareness of the importance of the fisheries section
• Lack/low lobbying for inland fisheries
• Low/wrong perception by government (particularly central ministries/departments)
• Lack/inadequate fisheries policies and legislation
• Inadequate reliable fisheries statistical data

3) How can these constraints be overcome?

• Develop and review fisheries policies and legislation
• Regional exchange of expertise
• Sourcing of funds from local government and donor agencies
• Improve data collection, compilation, analysis and dissemination
• Improve public awareness and lobbying of the fisheries sector in country and internationally
• Intensify consultation and cooperation within stakeholders
• Establish and strengthen regional mechanism for cooperation in fisheries
• Strengthen institutional capacity at all levels

4) How can national resources be mobilized to elaborate an NPOA-IUU before the June 2004 deadline?

• Solicit for emergency adequate funds
• Extend deadline

5) What considerations affect the ability of countries to deliver an NPOA-IUU by

June 2004?

• Funding
• Availability of human resources
• Time limit
• Regional/bilateral cooperation

6) Steps to be undertaken in elaborating a NPOA-IUU

WORKING GROUP 2 - INLAND FISHERIES

1) Which Ministries/Departments are involved in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Malawi -Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs
• Botswana - Department of Wildlife and National Parks, Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism
• Zimbabwe - Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, Ministry of Environment and Tourism
• Zambia - Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
• Swaziland - Fisheries Section, Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives
• Burundi - Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock
• Uganda - Department of Fisheries Resources, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries
• Ethiopia - Department of Livestock and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture

Other Ministries involved may include Justice, Internal Affairs, etc.

2) What constraints are likely to be faced in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Lack of RFMOs for fisheries in shared waters
• Inadequate funding
• Inadequate capacity/personnel (due to other commitments and shortage of manpower)
• Inadequate technical capacity
• Political support for progress to be made
• Lack of autonomy of fisheries sector in the country due to organizational structure
• Government policy (e.g., agricultural subsidies which influence the need for fisheries subsidies)
• Priorities of the Department/Ministry involved in the elaboration of NPOA - IUU
• Lack of and/or inadequate policy guidelines and legal framework in fisheries

3) How can these constraints be overcome?

• Establish appropriate RFMOs
• Source internal or external funding e. g.
• Build technical capacity
• Seek political support through sensitization/awareness
• Adopt NPOA in line with Government policy
• Prioritize elaboration of NPOA-IUU in the annual workplan
• Review/formulate national policies and/legislation

4) How can national resources be mobilized to elaborate an NPOA-IUU before the June 2004 deadline?

• Review annual workplans and budgets to accommodate NPOA-IUU
• Lobby for supplementary budget provisions

5) What considerations affect the ability of countries to deliver an NPOA-IUU by June 2004?

• 2004 Annual workplans have already been approved - and cannot be revised
• Lack of and/or inadequate policy guidelines and legal framework in fisheries
• Time constraints for fisheries personnel

6) Steps to be undertaken in elaborating a NPOA-IUU

WORKING GROUP 3 - EEZ FISHERIES

1) Which Ministries/Departments are involved in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

The Competent Authority for:

• Fisheries (marine and inland)
• Trade and industry
• Maritime affairs
• Police/justice
• Attorney General’s Office
• Legal matters
• National Planning
• Ports administration
• Foreign affairs

2) What constraints are likely to be faced in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Policy and legal framework
• Availability and quality of human, financial and material resources
• Human capacity
• Institutional capacity
• Cooperative mechanisms between Competent Authorities
• Ability to identify the scope and nature of the IUU problem
• Lack of good governance
• Channels of communication between all stakeholders

3) How can these constraints be overcome?

• Develop strong policy framework in support of NPOA-IUU

• Develop strong legal framework in support of NPOA-IUU

• Allocate sufficient resources for elaboration of NPOA-IUU

• Request Technical Assistance as required

• Secure donor assistance for equipment and training (development of national capacity)

• Raise awareness of IUU issues and the obligation for the State to act responsibly as a good international citizen

• Improve inter-stakeholder cooperation

• Improve inter-stakeholder communication

• Support human resource development

• Improve governance structures and modalities

• Utilise Technical Cooperation between Developing Countries, especially south-south cooperation

• Improve collaboration through and with RFMOs and relevant regional and international instruments

4) How can national resources be mobilized to elaborate an NPOA-IUU before the June 2004 deadline?

• Conduct inclusive national stakeholder consultation to:

  - raise IUU awareness
  - identify problems, constraints and issues
  - agree a strategy on elaboration of Plan
  - identify Competent Authority responsibilities and mechanisms for cooperation
  - identify financial implications and develop budget accordingly

• Draft NPOA for circulation, review and finalization

5) What considerations affect the ability of countries to deliver an NPOA-IUU by June 2004?

• Competing national priorities

• Availability of human, material and financial resources

• Relative importance of fisheries sector in the national economy

• Political importance/profile of the Competent Authority for fisheries

• Degree of awareness and importance attached to addressing IUU fishing

• FAO has the duty of reminding member States of their obligations to IPOA-IUU in general, especially in regard to the deadline

6) Steps to be undertaken in elaborating a NPOA-IUU

WORKING GROUP 4 - EEZ FISHERIES

1) Which Ministries/Departments are involved in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Ministry in charge of fisheries activities

2) What constraints are likely to be faced in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• National Legislation’s do not adequately address issues related to IUU
• MCS does not exist within the statutes i.e. no regulations are in place
• No observer Programmes
• Terms and conditions of licensing do not address IUU aspects
• Lack of coordination between line ministries during registration
• Undeterrent penalties
• Lack of enough equipment to carry out adequate surveillance
• Sovereignty issues not yet finalized on disputed maritime boundaries and EEZ
• Failure by some states to be signatories to the 1982 UN Convention and RFMOs
• Lack of political will
• Inexistence of harmonized laws and regulations in accordance with the 1982 UN Convention
• Absence of clear conservation measures regarding discard of by-catch
• Transshipment not adequately addressed

3) How can these constraints be overcome?

• Legislation to be revisited, reviewed, amended, updated and improved as the case may be, to ensure that IUU is fully addressed

• Introduction of regulations to cater for issues not addressed by the existing legislation

• A high powered technical committee to oversea and address noted inadequacies to be established

• Need to establish an observer programme and provide relevant training

• Government to mobilize human and material equipment required for MCS

• Identify fields for technical assistance

• Demarcation of maritime boundaries in accordance with the UN delimitation laws

• Make efforts to accede to the 1982 UN Convention and join RFMOs

• Sensitizing political leaders on the need to eliminate IUU

• Harmonizing national laws in order to accommodate the 1982 UN Convention requirement

• Ban discards at sea

• Establishing RFMOs and MCS

• Vigorous media campaigns through documentaries and well designed TV, radio and print media information networks.

4) How can national resources be mobilized to elaborate an NPOA-IUU before the June 2004 deadline?

• The proposed high powered technical committee to be established immediately with clear term of references to deal with the issues mentioned in 2 and 3 above

5) What considerations affect the ability of countries to deliver an NPOA-IUU by June 2004?

• Legislation is a slow process

• Developing countries suffer from inadequate financial, technical, and human resources required for rapid response to IUU requirement

WORKING GROUP 5 - HIGH SEAS FISHERIES

1) Which Ministries/Departments are involved in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Ministry/Authority/Department responsible for fisheries
• Ministry responsible for Foreign Affairs/Ports
• Coast Guard
• Attorney General’s Office
• Prime Minster’s Office

2) What constraints are likely to be faced in the elaboration of an NPOA-IUU?

• Awareness of all ministries/departments/stakeholders on NPOA - IUU
• Technical expertise in international law of the sea in relation to fisheries
• Ratification of 1995 UN Fish Stock Agreement and other relevant international instruments.
• Membership of regional bodies
• Political will
• Support for the fishing industry

3) How can these constraints be overcome?

• Raise awareness of Ministries and all stakeholders on NPOA-IUU
• Enlistment of appropriate staff
• Ratification of 1995 UN Fish Stock Agreement and relevant international instrument
• Become member of the regional bodies (contracting and non-contracting party)
• Regional Ministers meeting on NPOA-IUU

4) How can national resources be mobilized to elaborate an NPOA-IUU before the June 2004 deadline?

• Set up a task force under the aegis of the Ministry responsible for fisheries (all stakeholders and appropriate ministries)

• Liaise with RFMO and governments

5) What considerations affect the ability of countries to deliver an NPOA-IUU by June 2004?

• Technical capacity - knowledge on international instruments
• Administrative bottle necks for example comments/approval by ministries and stakeholders

6) Steps to be undertaken in elaborating a NPOA-IUU