DIPLOMASI MARITIM INDONESIA DI IORA PADA KASUS ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED, DAN UNREGULATED FISHING

Maritime sovereignty is an integral part of the Indonesia�s foreign policy, historically in the era of Nusantara, many competitions to conquer maritime territory was even tangible from the era of Majapahit and Sriwijaya kingdom during their ruling. With the notion of Indonesia as the world�s maritime axis, Indonesia�s diplomacy is defined clearly by the manifestation of efforts either in bilateral, regional, and multilateral. This article discussed on how Indonesia�s diplomacy through IORA cooperation is done to overcome the issue of IUU fishing during the presidency of Joko Widodo from 2015 until 2020. Indonesia�s IORA Chairmanship from 2015-2017 has rejuvenate Jakarta�s maritime diplomacy. Indonesia�s diplomacy depicted that Indonesia is beyond thatn norm-setting but also to the level where Indonesia assert their identity as a sovereign maritime axis amid the challenges and modernization that made non-traditional security as one of the core of contemporary diplomacy.

One Fish, Two Fish, Few Fish, No Fish: Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, IUU Fishing and High Seas Fisheries Management

<p>The World's fisheries are in a desperate state, they have been utilised to a point where a majority of the fisheries resources are fully exploited. In addition to overfishing, the responsibility of the sad state of affairs of the world's High Seas' fish stocks can be put down to inefficient management. The high seas fisheries regime is dominated by two powerful, tried, tested and consented to norms: the principle of freedom of fishing on the high seas and the principle of exclusive flag state jurisdiction over flagged vessels on the high seas. These Grotius norms (unintentionally) obstruct effective and meaningful high seas fisheries management, and have enabled unscrupulous states and actors to take advantage of the lacunae created by the UNCLOS High Seas fisheries framework and engage in IUU fishing which has resulted in a tragedy of the high seas commons. Furthermore these norms have a 'hobbling' effect on RFMOS and coastal states alike, and leave them almost powerless to ensure flag-state compliance with their sustainable fishing measures without the consent of the flag state, and totally unable to enforce its measures directly on that flagged vessel. Thus in the absence of an express reference to the superiority of coastal state rights over those of high seas fishing states, freedom of high seas fishing prevails. However the international community armed with weaker UNCLOS obligations of conservation and co-operation and have fought the good fight, and in lightening speed have constructed a normative framework that is additional to but consistent and complimentary with the UNCLOS regime. With the use of port state measures, voluntary instruments that codify responsible fisheries practice, surveillance and the denial of the right to land IUU fish – the fight is gradually beginning to turn in favour of the international community.</p>

One Fish, Two Fish, Few Fish, No Fish: Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, IUU Fishing and High Seas Fisheries Management

<p>The World's fisheries are in a desperate state, they have been utilised to a point where a majority of the fisheries resources are fully exploited. In addition to overfishing, the responsibility of the sad state of affairs of the world's High Seas' fish stocks can be put down to inefficient management. The high seas fisheries regime is dominated by two powerful, tried, tested and consented to norms: the principle of freedom of fishing on the high seas and the principle of exclusive flag state jurisdiction over flagged vessels on the high seas. These Grotius norms (unintentionally) obstruct effective and meaningful high seas fisheries management, and have enabled unscrupulous states and actors to take advantage of the lacunae created by the UNCLOS High Seas fisheries framework and engage in IUU fishing which has resulted in a tragedy of the high seas commons. Furthermore these norms have a 'hobbling' effect on RFMOS and coastal states alike, and leave them almost powerless to ensure flag-state compliance with their sustainable fishing measures without the consent of the flag state, and totally unable to enforce its measures directly on that flagged vessel. Thus in the absence of an express reference to the superiority of coastal state rights over those of high seas fishing states, freedom of high seas fishing prevails. However the international community armed with weaker UNCLOS obligations of conservation and co-operation and have fought the good fight, and in lightening speed have constructed a normative framework that is additional to but consistent and complimentary with the UNCLOS regime. With the use of port state measures, voluntary instruments that codify responsible fisheries practice, surveillance and the denial of the right to land IUU fish – the fight is gradually beginning to turn in favour of the international community.</p>

Fishing boat detection using Sentinel-1 validated with VIIRS Data

Detecting fishing boat activity is still a challenge for the biggest archipelago countries, such as Indonesia, to monitor the huge marine area. Space technology using sensors SAR to detect ships has been developed since 1985. However, the cost of using SAR images is one of the barriers to operational aspects, mainly for detecting fishing boats to deter IUU fishing activities. This research aims to evaluate the use of Sentinel 1-SAR imagery for identifying fishing boats from space. We used VIIRS data for validating the purposes. Both data sources could be accessed freely. The object detection process can be derived into three steps: pre-processing, object detection and object validation. We used the constant false alarm rate (CFAR) method to discriminate against objects at sea. To identify fishing vessels, we used the size of the vessels and the intensity of light captured by VIIRS. According to the findings, 21 boats were discovered using sentinel 1-SAR imagery and four boats using VIIRS data based on the the area of interest.

Analysis of implementation of the Russian National Plan of Actions to Prevent, Restrict and Eliminate Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing and additional measures to fight it (proposals for its further development) (part 3)

Series of articles includes a general description of the problem, an analysis of the Russian Federation's implementation of the National plan of Action to Prevent, Restrict and Eliminate Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) fishing by the Russian fishing fleet in the Russian Maritime Exclusive Economic Zone and beyond zone of national jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. Basing on our analysis we prepared proposals on strengthening fishing control measures, legal instruments to combat IUU fishing, including changes in legislation and adjustment of the Plan for the new term until 2025, improvement of the monitoring system for fishing activities, methods for assessing IUU fishing, improving the efficiency of fisheries management, market mechanisms to combat IUU fishing and voluntary control measures and creating an enabling environment for the prevention of IUU fishing.

Promoting Cooperation of Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance of IUU Fishing in the Asia-Pacific

Illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing is becoming a growing threat to sustainable fisheries and the economy worldwide. To solve this issue, various efforts on monitoring, control, and surveillance (MCS) have been made at the national, regional, and international levels. However, there is still the lack of measures against IUU fishing vessels at the multilateral level. Here, we assessed the situations of fisheries, and the current systems and challenges of MCS in eight Asia-Pacific countries with a focus on MCS of IUU fishing vessels at sea. Through a literature review and interviews, we confirmed that IUU fishing was linked with the status of fisheries in each country, and that each country implements various MCS measures with different emphases. However, there was a trend of enhancing or newly establishing four areas of MCS: vessel tracking, patrol, onboard observers, and port State measures, with amended or newly adopted laws. We also identified challenges of MCS such as insufficient MCS in coastal areas and fragmented cooperation among the countries. Based on our findings, we advance several recommendations including the enhancement of cooperation among stakeholders, especially fishers, for co-monitoring in coastal areas and the establishment of a communication platform for Asia-Pacific countries.

A Perspective on the Role of Eco-Certification in Eliminating Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing

Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities threaten marine biodiversity, livelihoods, food security, and human rights across the globe. Often occurring in waters that are difficult to control, and across multi-sector, transboundary, value chains that are hard to regulate, such a complex and heterogeneous problem requires multiple strategies beyond sovereign nations’ legislation alone. Here we explore the mechanisms through which eco-certification, by fostering private-public and cross-jurisdiction cooperation, can incentivize fishers to adopt best practices in harvesting and ecosystem impacts mitigation, increase the transparency of fishery operations and accountability to suppliers. The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) sets globally recognized standards for fisheries sustainability and supply chain assurance, based on the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Building on the MSC experience of over 400 certified fisheries representing 18% of global wild marine catch, we analyze examples and available information on the changes achieved by the seafood industry through engagement with the program, with particular focus on the elimination or reduction of illegal, unreported or unregulated fishing practices. We propose here that different, interlinked mechanisms come into play: the Standards provide best practice guidelines for improved catch documentation, monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS), and strengthening regulations. These lead to change either through (1) direct improvements required for fisheries to achieve the certificate (e.g., in Fishery Improvement Projects) or, (2) once certified, to maintain the certificate, or (3) as an emergent effect of the engagement process itself, requiring stakeholder cooperation and transparent information-sharing leading to a greater culture of compliance, and (4), as an effect of strengthening chain of custody documentation and standardizing it across jurisdictions. We also discuss limitations, such as the capacity for fisheries in low-income regions to embark on the management and social reform required, and evolving challenges in seafood sustainability, such as ethical concerns for forced and child labor and shark finning. While not the single silver bullet against such a complex problem, we argue that certification is an important tool in addressing IUU fishing.