While it has become very clear from the discussion so far that CCAMLR is highly
unique, the question that remains is whether or not it is an RFMO. In 2002 there was
broad agreement among the Members that CCAMLR has “the attributes of an
RFMO within the context of the UN and its subsidiary bodies”.
64 Or—in other
words—CCAMLR is ‘more than an RFMO’. It is submitted that this continues to be
the most persuasive qualification of CCAMLR today. As is implied above, this
qualification is not so much justified by its unique objective and the key role
accorded to scientific research. Rather, it is above all justified by the fact that
CCAMLR is a component of the ATS,
65 and thereby directly linked to the
unresolved question on title to land territory south of 60
South and the associated
principal objective of safeguarding peace that is enshrined in the Antarctic Treaty as
well as in the CAMLR Convention.
66
3.4.5 A Role-Oriented Approach to RFMO/As
According to the definition set out at the end of Sect. 3.1, RFMO/As must have a
dual mandate of conservation and management (or sustainable use) of fisheries
resources. This therefore excludes bodies that are only aimed at the conservation
of fish species, for instance the Meeting of Signatories under the global MOU on
Sharks.
67 Moreover, due to fact that EAF management is at present generally
accepted to be a global minimum standard, the dual mandate of RFMO/As is not
confined to target species but also extends to the impacts of fishing on non-target
species and the broader marine environment (e.g. vulnerable benthic habitats).
The previous subsection qualified CCAMLR as ‘more than an RFMO’ on
account of its integration in the ATS, whose principal role is safeguarding peace.
CCAMLR can therefore be regarded as performing a role in safeguarding peace in
addition to its role on conservation and management of fisheries resources. This
raises the question if there are (other) RFMO/As that perform additional roles
besides conservation and management of fisheries resources. The examples provided
below illustrate that such a ‘role-oriented approach’ to RFMO/As is supported by the
rules and practices of several RFMO/As. Moreover, in view of the considerable
diversity among regional regimes that operate under the overarching framework of
the international law of the sea, it is not always easy to categorize bodies as RFMO/
As, regional seas programmes or other types of regional ocean governance mechanisms.
68 Looking at them through the lens of roles may therefore provide a better
Judgement in Joined Cases C-626/15 and C-659/16. The Netherlands eventually applied for
membership on 9 September 2019 and became a Member on 8 October 2019.
64 Report of the 21st (2002) Annual CCAMLR Meeting at 88 (para. 15.2).
65 Report of the 14th (1995) Annual CCAMLR Meeting at 70 (para. 15.2).
66 Cf. PP 2 and Art. I of the Antarctic Treaty and PP 9 and Art. III of the CAMLR Convention.
67 Note 25 supra and accompanying text.
68 See in this regard Billé et al. (2016), who focus on regional seas programmes, RFBs, and large
marine ecosystem (LME) mechanisms.
96
E. J. Molenaar
unique, the question that remains is whether or not it is an RFMO. In 2002 there was
broad agreement among the Members that CCAMLR has “the attributes of an
RFMO within the context of the UN and its subsidiary bodies”.
64 Or—in other
words—CCAMLR is ‘more than an RFMO’. It is submitted that this continues to be
the most persuasive qualification of CCAMLR today. As is implied above, this
qualification is not so much justified by its unique objective and the key role
accorded to scientific research. Rather, it is above all justified by the fact that
CCAMLR is a component of the ATS,
65 and thereby directly linked to the
unresolved question on title to land territory south of 60
South and the associated
principal objective of safeguarding peace that is enshrined in the Antarctic Treaty as
well as in the CAMLR Convention.
66
3.4.5 A Role-Oriented Approach to RFMO/As
According to the definition set out at the end of Sect. 3.1, RFMO/As must have a
dual mandate of conservation and management (or sustainable use) of fisheries
resources. This therefore excludes bodies that are only aimed at the conservation
of fish species, for instance the Meeting of Signatories under the global MOU on
Sharks.
67 Moreover, due to fact that EAF management is at present generally
accepted to be a global minimum standard, the dual mandate of RFMO/As is not
confined to target species but also extends to the impacts of fishing on non-target
species and the broader marine environment (e.g. vulnerable benthic habitats).
The previous subsection qualified CCAMLR as ‘more than an RFMO’ on
account of its integration in the ATS, whose principal role is safeguarding peace.
CCAMLR can therefore be regarded as performing a role in safeguarding peace in
addition to its role on conservation and management of fisheries resources. This
raises the question if there are (other) RFMO/As that perform additional roles
besides conservation and management of fisheries resources. The examples provided
below illustrate that such a ‘role-oriented approach’ to RFMO/As is supported by the
rules and practices of several RFMO/As. Moreover, in view of the considerable
diversity among regional regimes that operate under the overarching framework of
the international law of the sea, it is not always easy to categorize bodies as RFMO/
As, regional seas programmes or other types of regional ocean governance mechanisms.
68 Looking at them through the lens of roles may therefore provide a better
Judgement in Joined Cases C-626/15 and C-659/16. The Netherlands eventually applied for
membership on 9 September 2019 and became a Member on 8 October 2019.
64 Report of the 21st (2002) Annual CCAMLR Meeting at 88 (para. 15.2).
65 Report of the 14th (1995) Annual CCAMLR Meeting at 70 (para. 15.2).
66 Cf. PP 2 and Art. I of the Antarctic Treaty and PP 9 and Art. III of the CAMLR Convention.
67 Note 25 supra and accompanying text.
68 See in this regard Billé et al. (2016), who focus on regional seas programmes, RFBs, and large
marine ecosystem (LME) mechanisms.
96
E. J. Molenaar