The Regulation of ‘Fishing’ and Related Activities

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-116
Author(s):  
Camille Goodman
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Authority ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Multiple Actors

This Chapter examines the material scope of the coastal State’s jurisdiction over foreign vessels in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) on the basis of its sovereign rights over living resources, in order to determine what activities and which vessels come within this regulatory power. It argues that ‘fishing’ is no longer simply a process that involves fishing vessels catching fish; in the modern industrial fishing complex, where bunkering, transhipment, and resupply services allow fishing vessels to stay at sea for months at a time, fishing is part of a chain of events involving multiple actors and activities, all of which fall within the regulatory authority of the coastal State in the EEZ. Notwithstanding the conflicting and inconsistent approaches that international courts and tribunals have taken to this issue, the Chapter’s examination of national, regional, and international practice demonstrates that coastal States can regulate a wide range of fishing and related activities on the basis of their sovereign rights over living resources in the EEZ. This includes all the ‘fishing related activities’ and ‘fishing support vessels’ that are involved in modern industrial fishing, regardless of whether the vessels in question are licensed to fish in the coastal State’s EEZ, or whether the activities in question relate to living resources harvested in the coastal State’s EEZ. This finding as to the underlying scope of coastal State jurisdiction provides a crucial foundation for the remainder of the book.

Rights, Obligations, Prohibitions: A Practical Guide to Understanding Judicial Decisions on Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 558-584
Author(s):  
Camille Goodman
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Highly Qualified ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Practical Guide ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Economic Zone

Abstract Given the ambiguous, open-ended and highly qualified nature of the legal framework governing the coastal State’s regulation of living resources in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), there is an important role for international courts and tribunals in reviewing the innovations and interpretations offered by coastal States, and clarifying the meaning of relevant provisions. In light of the significant body of jurisprudence that is now available in this area, this article seeks to provide some practical guidance regarding the nature and extent of coastal State jurisdiction over living resources in the EEZ, by reference to the approaches taken by international courts and tribunals.

Coastal State Jurisdiction over Living Resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Goodman
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
In Transit ◽  
The Way

Under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), coastal States have sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve, and manage the living resources of the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ). However, nearly forty years after the adoption of the LOSC , there is still a great deal of uncertainty about the nature and extent of these sovereign rights. This book examines the ways in which coastal States can exercise authority on the basis of their sovereign rights over living resources in the EEZ. It explores the key concepts of ‘fishing’ and ‘fishing related activities’ to establish what vessels and which activities can be regulated by coastal States, canvasses the criteria and conditions that coastal States can apply as part of regulating foreign access to their resources, and considers the regulation of unlicensed foreign fishing vessels in transit through the EEZ. It also examines the way in which such regulations can be enforced within the EEZ and the circumstances under which enforcement can take place beyond the EEZ following hot pursuit. Based on its review and analysis of the practice of 145 coastal States, the book identifies the contemporary ‘extent’ of coastal State jurisdiction over living resources in the EEZ and proposes a formulation of the underlying and enduring ‘nature’ of that jurisdiction which could be applied to resolve future jurisdictional challenges in the EEZ.

Upsetting the Balance? The Legality of Vessel Confiscation under the losc after the M/V Virginia G Case

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-198
Author(s):  
Zoe Scanlon
Keyword(s):  
International Community ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Specific Content ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Delicate Balance ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
State Rights ◽  
Fishing Practices ◽  
Flag State

Abstract Although a delicate ‘balance’ was struck between coastal State rights and flag State freedoms in the exclusive economic zone (eez) during negotiations of the losc, uncertainty persists around the specific content of these rights and freedoms. This uncertainty has been highlighted through numerous legal disputes regarding the confiscation of foreign fishing vessels for eez fisheries offences—now a common feature in coastal State maritime enforcement regimes. Amidst longstanding ambiguity around the legality of vessel confiscation regimes and their permissible design, M/V Virginia G was the first itlos decision to consider these questions directly. This article evaluates whether the decision provided greater clarity on these questions. In doing so, it reflects on the strikingly altered realities of fishing practices since the negotiation of the losc, and whether the Tribunal’s approach reflects an appropriate application of the eez ‘balance’ in light of contemporary circumstances faced by the international community today.

scholarly journals Theorizing the Judicialization of International Relations

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen J Alter ◽  
Emilie M Hafner-Burton ◽  
Laurence R Helfer
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Design Features ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Thematic Section ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Multiple Actors

Abstract This article introduces a Thematic Section and theorizes the multiple ways that judicializing international relations shifts power away from national executives and legislatures toward litigants, judges, arbitrators, and other nonstate decision-makers. We identify two preconditions for judicialization to occur—(1) delegation to an adjudicatory body charged with applying designated legal rules, and (2) legal rights-claiming by actors who bring—or threaten to bring—a complaint to one or more of these bodies. We classify the adjudicatory bodies that do and do not contribute to judicializing international relations, including but not limited to international courts. We then explain how rights-claiming initiates a process for authoritatively determining past violations of the law, identifying remedies for those violations, and preventing future violations. Because judicializing international relations occurs in multiple phases, in multiple locations, and involves multiple actors as decision-makers, governments often do not control the timing, nature, or extent to which political and policy decisions are adjudicated. Delegation—and the associated choice of institutional design features—is thus only the first step in a chain of processes that determine how a diverse array of nonstate actors influence politically consequential decisions.

Marine Natura 2000 and Fishery – The Case of Sweden

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Christiernsson ◽  
Gabriel Michanek ◽  
Pontus Nilsson
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Member States ◽  
Fishing Vessels ◽  
Fisheries Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Economic Zone

Fishing operations likely to have a significant effect on a marine Natura 2000 area shall be subject to prior assessment and authorisation according to Article 6.3 of the Habitats Directive. This provision, partly also article 6.2, and in particular the cjeu case law, implies that this prior control should be applied rather often in practice, even for recurrent fishery irrespective of when the first fishing operation occurred in an area. Article 11 of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation entails that Sweden and other Member States apply Article 6 of the Habitats Directive within the entire exclusive economic zone, to both own and foreign fishing vessels. A Member State is also, under certain preconditions, empowered to impose restrictions on fishery not supported by article 6 of the Habitats Directive, especially within the 12 nautical miles zone. A Member State is not formally hindered from excluding fishery from prior assessment and authorisation if instead general requirements on fishery in legislation can ensure that no future fishing operation is likely to have a significant effect on the Natura 2000 area. However, cjeu case law indicates that it would be difficult to fulfil that precondition.

The M/V “Virginia G” Case (Panama/Guinea-Bissau) (ITLOS)

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 1161-1226
Author(s):  
Vincent Cogliati-Bantz
Keyword(s):  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Guinea Bissau ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
The Law

On April 14, 2014, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (the Tribunal) rendered its Judgment in the case of the M/V Virginia G.. The judgment notably clarifies the scope of the sovereign rights of a coastal state with respect to living resources in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

scholarly journals TELAAH KONSEPSI NEGARA HUKUM DAN DEMOKRASI DALAM PEMBENTUKAN BLUE CONSTITUTION DI INDONESIA

SASI ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 52
Author(s):  
Fathan Ali Mubiina
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
The State ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
What Is Said ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
The Right ◽  
Sea Area ◽  
Maritime Territory

The supporting idea of this topics relates to the term of exclusive economic zone which is defined as a territorial sea outside, coastal states that have sovereignty over all natural resources in them and have the right to the application of Coastal state jurisdiction. This zone is located at 200 miles from the base of the territorial sea. Indonesia requires the Blue Constitution or maritime constitution as a constitutional basis for the use of maritime territory in Indonesia. This is what is said to be horizontally integrated territory. There is also the condition of a country's territorial territory separated from other countries' territorial territories. The essence of the state is to control a territory and be recognized internationally. There is existing country if it occupies an area which is its right to the interests of social and geographical unity. The sea area of a country such as Indonesia contained in the provisions of the 1945 Constitution is referred as the blue constitution inside.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document