Protection of marine environment and conservation of marine living resources are at the heart of this Convention. Millennium Development Goals MDGs , The Millennium Development Goals , eight non-binding goals pertaining to poverty, education, gender equality, and environmental sustainability, were formulated by world leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in to be achieved by Goal 7 of these eight goals deals with ensuring environmental sustainability with four more specific targets to be achieved. Two of the four targets set under the Goal 7 -- integrating the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reducing biodiversity loss -- are relevant to marine resource management.
Goal 14 of the recently adopted SDGs goals is dedicated to conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and proper management of the living and non-living resources present in the oceans. Like the millennium development goals, the sustainable development goals are also not legally binding, and governments are expected to take ownership and establish national frameworks for the achievement of these goals. Regional Fisheries Management Instruments. Most fish live and die in a region while others migrate across regions during their lifetime. So, the regulatory framework for fisheries management should consider the circumstances of each region including the nature and quantity of the marine living resources within its jurisdiction.
Most international fisheries instruments reiterated the need for establishing regional and sub-regional arrangements for sustainable management of the fisheries resources of each region.
International journal of Fisheries science and Research
Consequently, a wide range of regional fisheries management agreements has been adopted with a view to ensuring conservation and management of high seas fish stocks, shared fish stocks, straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. These instruments generally contain provisions on total allowable catch TAC , catch allocation among members, conservation principles, management measures, etc. One of the responses to international concerns for conservation of high seas marine fishery resources has been regional action, often through States cooperating to establish regional organizations.
The functions of RFMO include, among others, collection, analysis and dissemination of fisheries data and information, and coordination of fisheries management through joint schemes and mechanisms. These RFMOs also serve as technical and policy fora, and take decisions relating to the conservation, management, development and responsible use of the fisheries resources. The mandates of RFMOs vary. Some RFMOs have an advisory mandate, and provide advice, decisions or coordinating mechanisms that are not binding on their members, others have a management mandate, and management measures adopted by them are binding on their members.
Customary international law is a State practice accepted as law. A State practice needs to fulfil two requirements to qualify as a customary international law — existence of a State practice and opinio juris existence of a belief that such practice is legal requirement.
In the realm of fisheries regulation, several State practices are considered as customary international law.
International dispute settlement bodies including International Court of Justice ICJ and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea ITLOS have been playing an instrumental role in the development of international fisheries law through their decisions delivered in fisheries related matters. These decisions offer detailed analysis of the relevant treaty provisions, existence of any custom, presence of any special requirement or circumstance between the disputing parties, etc. Below is a brief description of some seminal decisions delivered by international dispute settlement bodies on matters involving fisheries jurisdiction, maritime delimitation, conservation and management of fish stocks, etc.
Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case The UK v Norway , Norway enacted a decree in claiming as the baseline of Norwegian territorial waters the general line of the Skjaergaard, and consequently, certain fishing grounds what was formerly parts of the high seas became Norwegian fishing zones. As a response to this, the United Kingdom requested the International Court of Justice to determine the validity of the lines of delimitation of the Norwegian fisheries zone as set forth in the Decree in under international law.
The Court concluded that neither the method of drawing nor the actual baselines drawn by Norway was contrary to international law. In reaching this decision, the Court considered the peculiar geography of the Norwegian coast and the economic interests peculiar to the region. Although this case is referred to as Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries Case , it did not deal with fisheries, rather, it dealt with maritime boundary delimitation. Iceland, ; Federal Republic of Germany v.
Iceland, ; Spain v. Canada, Two cases, viz. Iceland and Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland were brought before the International Court of Justice ICJ by the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany following an extension by Iceland of its exclusive fisheries jurisdiction from a distance of 12 to a distance of 50 nautical miles and the prohibition of all foreign fishing activities therein.
The Court found that the Icelandic regulations constituting a unilateral extension of exclusive fishing rights to a limit of 50 nautical miles were not opposable to either the United Kingdom or the Federal Republic of Germany. The court also found that Iceland was not entitled unilaterally to exclude the British and German fishing vessels from the disputed areas. Finally, court ruled that the parties were under a mutual obligation to undertake negotiations for an equitable solution of the disputes relating to the apportionment of the fishery resources, considering the preferential rights of Iceland, the established rights of the United Kingdom and of the Federal Republic of Germany as well as any interest of other States.
In another case between Spain and Canada Spain v. Canada , a Spanish fishing vessel was seized and its master arrested on charges of violations of the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act by the Canadian authority.
- Remembering Edith Alice Müller (Astrophysics and Space Science Library)!
- Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality (Canto Classics)?
- Navigation menu.
- Table of Contents.
Spain brought the case before ICJ alleging that the Canadian authority had violated various principles and norms of international law. The Court found that the dispute between the Parties was pertaining to the enforcement of conservation and management measures taken by Canada with respect to vessels fishing in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization NAFO regulatory area falls within the terms of one of the reservations in the Canadian declaration. The Court, therefore, found that it had no jurisdiction to adjudicate in the case.
Japan; Australia v. The Tribunal, upon hearing the parties, prescribed four provisional measures. However, the Arbitral Tribunal finally concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the dispute and it also revoked the provisional measures prescribed by ITLOS. Whaling in the Antarctic Australia v.
The request included four specific questions regarding the obligations of the flag State in cases where IUU fishing activities are conducted within the Exclusive Economic Zone EEZ of third party States and the extent of liability of the flag State for IUU fishing activities conducted by vessels sailing under its flag. In its advisory opinion, ITLOS reiterated the provisions of Law of the Sea Convention regarding conservation and management of marine living resources specifically in Articles 61 and 62 emphasising on the obligations of coastal states and flag states.
International fisheries law comprises several key issues and concepts.
Research, Internships & Study Abroad
While some of these concepts are related to the fundamental principles of fisheries management, others fall under the broad area of the law of the sea. As a framework convention on the law of the sea, UNCLOS deals with a wide range of such topics and is the general starting point for researchers of international fisheries law. Below is a brief account of some key concepts of international fisheries law:.
Add To. Page Content. About the Albion Fisheries Research Centre. It was almost entirely constructed and equipped with the assistance of the Government of Japan under a Grant Aid Project, in three phases, between and to cope with the increasing number of projects being implemented. The AFRC is the technical arm of the Ministry of Fisheries and carries out applied research, development and management activities. It monitors fishing activities of local and foreign licensed vessels as part of a coherent management strategy to improve the sustainable exploitation of resources to reduce illegal, unreported and unregulated IUU fishing in Mauritian EEZ.
The Centre has a staff strength of some 85 officers in the scientific and technical grade supported by the administrative staff and manual workers. The basic objectives of the Albion Fisheries Research Centre are:. Developing management plans for sustainable exploitation of the resources and new fishing areas;.
Hull International Fisheries Institute
The Principal Fisheries Officer. Albion Fisheries Research Centre. A manuscript number will be mailed to the corresponding author within one week or earlier. On the behalf of the International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies , I would like to extend my regard to the all fellow researchers and scholars and wish prosperity in their field. Journal is Indexed and Abstracted in following Database s.