Combating Illegal Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone: Flag State Obligations in the Context of the Primary Responsibility of the Coastal State

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

Combating Illegal Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone: Flag State Obligations in the Context of the Primary Responsibility of the Coastal State. / Schatz, Valentin J.
in: Göttingen Journal of International Law, Jahrgang 7, Nr. 2, 2016, S. 383-414.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{50d321098b6146198a5561d029aec32d,
title = "Combating Illegal Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone: Flag State Obligations in the Context of the Primary Responsibility of the Coastal State",
abstract = "Illegal fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zones [EEZs] of developing coastal States is an urgent problem for the marine environment, global food security, and local economies. While past academic debate has predominantly focused on obligations of flag States to tackle so called IUU-fishing in the High Seas, the recent request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS, Case No. 21) has drawn attention to the fisheries regime of the EEZ. This article argues that the primary responsibility for fisheries management in the EEZ rests on the coastal State and that, so far, flag States have no obligation under customary international law to exercise their jurisdiction and control over vessels flying their flag which fish in the EEZ of other States. The article first gives an account of coastal State regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction. It outlines recent developments of the law by drawing on the jurisprudence of the ITLOS, particularly the recent M/V “Virginia G” Case. Further, the article undertakes to identify potential flag State obligations to combat illegal fishing in the EEZ. To that end, it provides an in-depth analysis of relevant binding and non-binding legal instruments such as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, other multilateral treaties, bilateral fisheries treaties, and relevant soft-law instruments of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The article also discusses the relevance of principles of international environmental law. Next, the article analyzes the nature and scope of potential flag State obligations, qualifying them as obligations of due diligence. Finally, the article concludes that, de lege lata, no persuasive evidence of established flag State obligations exists. The author suggests that the situation should be remedied by a new, fully binding legal instrument. ",
keywords = "Law",
author = "Schatz, {Valentin J.}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.3249/1868-1581-7-2-schatz",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "383--414",
journal = "G{\"o}ttingen Journal of International Law",
issn = "1858-1581",
publisher = "Universit{\"a}tsverlag G{\"o}ttingen",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Combating Illegal Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone

T2 - Flag State Obligations in the Context of the Primary Responsibility of the Coastal State

AU - Schatz, Valentin J.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Illegal fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zones [EEZs] of developing coastal States is an urgent problem for the marine environment, global food security, and local economies. While past academic debate has predominantly focused on obligations of flag States to tackle so called IUU-fishing in the High Seas, the recent request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS, Case No. 21) has drawn attention to the fisheries regime of the EEZ. This article argues that the primary responsibility for fisheries management in the EEZ rests on the coastal State and that, so far, flag States have no obligation under customary international law to exercise their jurisdiction and control over vessels flying their flag which fish in the EEZ of other States. The article first gives an account of coastal State regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction. It outlines recent developments of the law by drawing on the jurisprudence of the ITLOS, particularly the recent M/V “Virginia G” Case. Further, the article undertakes to identify potential flag State obligations to combat illegal fishing in the EEZ. To that end, it provides an in-depth analysis of relevant binding and non-binding legal instruments such as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, other multilateral treaties, bilateral fisheries treaties, and relevant soft-law instruments of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The article also discusses the relevance of principles of international environmental law. Next, the article analyzes the nature and scope of potential flag State obligations, qualifying them as obligations of due diligence. Finally, the article concludes that, de lege lata, no persuasive evidence of established flag State obligations exists. The author suggests that the situation should be remedied by a new, fully binding legal instrument.

AB - Illegal fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zones [EEZs] of developing coastal States is an urgent problem for the marine environment, global food security, and local economies. While past academic debate has predominantly focused on obligations of flag States to tackle so called IUU-fishing in the High Seas, the recent request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS, Case No. 21) has drawn attention to the fisheries regime of the EEZ. This article argues that the primary responsibility for fisheries management in the EEZ rests on the coastal State and that, so far, flag States have no obligation under customary international law to exercise their jurisdiction and control over vessels flying their flag which fish in the EEZ of other States. The article first gives an account of coastal State regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction. It outlines recent developments of the law by drawing on the jurisprudence of the ITLOS, particularly the recent M/V “Virginia G” Case. Further, the article undertakes to identify potential flag State obligations to combat illegal fishing in the EEZ. To that end, it provides an in-depth analysis of relevant binding and non-binding legal instruments such as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, other multilateral treaties, bilateral fisheries treaties, and relevant soft-law instruments of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The article also discusses the relevance of principles of international environmental law. Next, the article analyzes the nature and scope of potential flag State obligations, qualifying them as obligations of due diligence. Finally, the article concludes that, de lege lata, no persuasive evidence of established flag State obligations exists. The author suggests that the situation should be remedied by a new, fully binding legal instrument.

KW - Law

U2 - 10.3249/1868-1581-7-2-schatz

DO - 10.3249/1868-1581-7-2-schatz

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 7

SP - 383

EP - 414

JO - Göttingen Journal of International Law

JF - Göttingen Journal of International Law

SN - 1858-1581

IS - 2

ER -

DOI