Indonesian or foreign fishing vessels.
46 Even though this regulation aims to set a bar
for humane working conditions, it increases the costs of doing legitimate fishing.
3 Possible Market-Based Measures to Deter IUU Fishing
in Indonesia
The IPOA-IUU is the first international instrument, which explicitly provides internationally agreed market-related measures to address IUU fishing.
47 It requires
States to take all necessary steps to prevent the entry of IUU-sourced fish into the
supply chain, but in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner.
48 However, it
explicitly limits the use of trade-related measures only in exceptional circumstances,
where other measures have proven unsuccessful, and only after prior consultation
with the affected States.
49 The steps taken must be restricted to what is necessary and
consistent with international law, including the World Trade Organization [WTO]
rules,
50 and should be based on scientific evidence.
51 The scientific evidence
requirement has to pay attention to the precautionary principle,
52 which means
inadequate scientific evidence shall not be used as a ground for postponing conservation and management measures where the damage to the environment is likely.
This chapter will not go deep into an analysis of the compatibility of WTO rules and
trade measures against IUU fishing as it has already been discussed elsewhere.
53 In
short, trade measures do not breach the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
[GATT] as long as they fall under its general exceptions
54 and be conducted in a fair,
transparent and non-discriminatory manner.
Despite its non-binding status, the IPOA-IUU has been able to provide states and
RFMOs with guidelines on specific issues, including market-related measures.
55 The
IPOA-IUU reiterates the principles of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries [FAO Code of Conduct], which stresses the need to abide by WTO rules.
56
46 See Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries’ Regulation No. 42 on the Fisher’s Work
Agreement.
47 IPOA-IUU, paras. 66–76.
48 Id., para. 66.
49 Ibid.
50 Ibid.
51 Id., para. 67.
52 Art. 119(1) of UNCLOS requires that States must take into account ‘the best scientific evidence
available’ in determining fisheries conservation and management measures.
53 See Young (2016), pp. 209–219; Tsamenyi et al. (2009).
54 General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (1994), Art. XX.
55 Edeson (2001), pp. 603–623.
56 See IPOA-IUU, para. 66; Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, October 31, 1995, FAO
Doc. 95/20/Rev/1, Arts 6.14 and 11.2.
128
D. Liliansa
46 Even though this regulation aims to set a bar
for humane working conditions, it increases the costs of doing legitimate fishing.
3 Possible Market-Based Measures to Deter IUU Fishing
in Indonesia
The IPOA-IUU is the first international instrument, which explicitly provides internationally agreed market-related measures to address IUU fishing.
47 It requires
States to take all necessary steps to prevent the entry of IUU-sourced fish into the
supply chain, but in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner.
48 However, it
explicitly limits the use of trade-related measures only in exceptional circumstances,
where other measures have proven unsuccessful, and only after prior consultation
with the affected States.
49 The steps taken must be restricted to what is necessary and
consistent with international law, including the World Trade Organization [WTO]
rules,
50 and should be based on scientific evidence.
51 The scientific evidence
requirement has to pay attention to the precautionary principle,
52 which means
inadequate scientific evidence shall not be used as a ground for postponing conservation and management measures where the damage to the environment is likely.
This chapter will not go deep into an analysis of the compatibility of WTO rules and
trade measures against IUU fishing as it has already been discussed elsewhere.
53 In
short, trade measures do not breach the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
[GATT] as long as they fall under its general exceptions
54 and be conducted in a fair,
transparent and non-discriminatory manner.
Despite its non-binding status, the IPOA-IUU has been able to provide states and
RFMOs with guidelines on specific issues, including market-related measures.
55 The
IPOA-IUU reiterates the principles of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries [FAO Code of Conduct], which stresses the need to abide by WTO rules.
56
46 See Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries’ Regulation No. 42 on the Fisher’s Work
Agreement.
47 IPOA-IUU, paras. 66–76.
48 Id., para. 66.
49 Ibid.
50 Ibid.
51 Id., para. 67.
52 Art. 119(1) of UNCLOS requires that States must take into account ‘the best scientific evidence
available’ in determining fisheries conservation and management measures.
53 See Young (2016), pp. 209–219; Tsamenyi et al. (2009).
54 General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (1994), Art. XX.
55 Edeson (2001), pp. 603–623.
56 See IPOA-IUU, para. 66; Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, October 31, 1995, FAO
Doc. 95/20/Rev/1, Arts 6.14 and 11.2.
128
D. Liliansa