Fishermen protest demanding a ban on purse seine fishing in Puducherry, 2021 | photo credit: kumar ss
The Supreme Court of India has allowed fishermen Using purse seine fishing gear for fishing beyond territorial waters (12 nautical miles) and within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (200 nautical miles) of Tamil Nadu, but subject to certain restrictions. Court’s interim order dated January 24, 2023 against ban on purse seine fishing by Tamil Nadu government in February 2022 more concerned with regulating fishing with administrative and transparency measures than conservation measures and obligations of the coastal state appears to be. owed in its EEZ under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, conservation measures (as suggested in various regional conventions) and decisions of various tribunals (to implement conservation measures based on the best science or relevant scientific evidence and to protect endangered marine resources from extinction) are mandated. Should have informed. Purse seiners tend to be overfished, in contrast to traditional fishermen who use conventional fishing gear, thus threatening the livelihood of traditional fishermen.
conservation and convention
The apex court should seek guidance from obligations arising from multilateral and regional conventions to bring about sustainable fishing practices over a given period, allowing a common resource such as fish to naturally replenish. under Articles 56.1(a) and 56.1(b)(iii) of UNCLOS., Coastal States have the sovereign right to ensure that the living and non-living resources of the EEZ are utilised, protected and managed, and are not subject to over-exploitation. Entry into the area by foreign fleets is also entirely subject to the discretion of the coastal State and its laws and regulations. To prevent overexploitation, coastal states should determine the total allowable catch (TAC) in the EEZ (Article 61(1) and (2) of UNCLOS.) in the light of the best available scientific evidence. guidance from Convention for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna 1993 (SBT) could also be framed by the apex court for recovery of dwindling fishing stocks.
Read this also | Kerala conveys Centre’s apprehensions over draft guidelines for deep sea fishing
The essence of the SBT is the TAC and the distribution of allocations among the parties to the SBT, which are very relevant from the point of view of conservation of common fisheries. TAC and catch quotas are aimed at driving sustainable use practices among fishers and maintaining the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). Efforts to implement TAC and catch quotas may face scientific uncertainty concerning safe limits for ensuring MSY. In such a situation, established international environmental law practice relies on taking a precautionary approach.
regulation of fishing methods
Allowing only purse seiners for two days – Monday and Thursday from 8am to 6pm – (under a court order) is not sufficient without regulating fishing methods. International legal efforts are slowly moving towards abandoning the use of bycatch nets on a large scale. The sheer size of purse seine nets (2,000 m length and 200 m depth) allows maximum catch for purse seiners, in turn leaving behind an insufficient catch for traditional fishermen. There are several regional organizations that either prohibit the use of large drift nets or at least call for their prohibition, such as the South Pacific Forum’s Tarawa Declaration of 1989.
The 1989 Convention for the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Drift Nets in the South Pacific restricts port access to drift net fishing vessels. The United Nations General Assembly supported and strengthened this development by passing resolutions 44/225 (1989) and 46/215 (1991), calling for a moratorium on all large-scale pelagic drift net fishing vessels in the high seas. Although the Convention and the UN General Assembly Resolution apply to State Parties in the high seas, they are also relevant in the context of preventing overfishing in general and fisheries management in the EEZ.
on non-selective fishing techniques
The Court’s final decision required consideration of non-selective fishing methods by purse seiners that result in the loss of other marine living species (which may, at times, include endangered species) – a possible basis for a trade ban. Under Article XX(b) a Party may take measures to protect human, animal or plant life, provided that this includes “the protection of exhaustible natural resources, if such measures are accompanied by restrictions on domestic production or consumption”. is made effective” (Article XX(g) In Prawns/Turtles, the Appellate Body held that the US measure—which banned the importation of shrimp from any country that had access to turtle-excluded fish—than the United States The catching gear was not – the protection of all natural resources eligible for the Article XX(g) exception. However, the Appellate Body also found that the US measures were implemented in a way that violated Chapu: Western By treating some Asian countries differently than America’s trading partners in the hemisphere.
Read this also | Calls for blending innovations with indigenous knowledge to help small-scale fishermen
Despite the best conservation measures adopted by the authorities and regulation of fishing methods, it will be a challenge to deal with the limitless character of the ocean, which provides common resources like fish to all. Garrett Hardin’s theory, ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’, which states that ‘freedom in the commons ruins all else’ should convince all fishermen, especially purse seiners in Tamil Nadu, to comply with conservation measures. Should cooperate.
Anwar Sadat is Senior Assistant Professor of International Law specializing in Environmental Law at the Indian Society of International Law (ISIL), New Delhi. Email: sadatshazia@gmail.com