Fishing Quota and International Obligation: Why Has Indonesia been Indicated as a Non-Compliant State

Rachma Indriyani, Asmar Abdul Rahim, Ruzita Azmi

Abstract


Indonesia committed to conserving the tuna resources by participating in some RFMOs. From all regional organizations where Indonesia has been joined, the CCSBT is the unique one, due to it governs a single tuna species, which is called Southern Bluefin Tuna. This kind of tuna is essential for Indonesia because it is the world’s most expensive tuna and SBT migrates through Indonesian fisheries management zones and goes even further within the territorial waters, where the SBT spawning area is located. This natural characteristic distinguishes Indonesia from other Parties to CCSBT. Nevertheless, the Country has been dealing with its obligation to comply with national quota allocation. For some fishing season periods, the CCSBT indicated Indonesia as a non-compliant. By applying the qualitative approach, this study considers how Indonesia’s non-compliance has been addressed in fishing for shared fish stocks. The data collection was conducted through semi-structured interviews and legal analysis of law and policy instruments. This method leads the elaboration to reveal domestic factors affecting non-compliance by Indonesia. This study argues, the fisheries legislation should consider the provision concerning fishing for resources under quota system, hence, it will provide sufficient legal base to take enforcement measures towards non-compliance with fishing quota. 

Keywords


Compliance; Fishing Quota; Shared Fish Stocks; Quota Allocation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Al Amaren, E. M., M. Z. bin M. Nor, and C. T. B. M. Ismail. (2020). Risks and Remedy in Islamic and Conventional Letter of Credit: Jordanian Practices," Int. J. Islam. Econ., vol. 2, no. 01, 54-63.

Bell, J. D., Leber, K. M., Blankenship, H. L., Loneragan, N. R., & Masuda, R. (2008). A new era for restocking, stock enhancement and sea ranching of coastal fisheries resources. Reviews in fisheries science, 16(1-3), 1-9.

CCSBT. Corrective Actions Policy, Compliance Policy Guideline 3. (2018). Updated at the Twenty-Fifth Annual Meeting

Clark, E. A. (2011). Compliance enforcement in regional fisheries management organizations to which Australia is a party (Doctoral dissertation, University of Tasmania). 38.

Cogan, J. K. (2006). Noncompliance and the international rule of law. Yale J. Int'l L., 31, 189.

Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. (2013). Report of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Commission.

Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. (2019). Report of the Fourteenth Meeting of the Compliance Committee.

Cox, A. (2009). Quota allocation in international fisheries. OECD Food, Agric. Fish. Pap., no. 22, pp. 1

Elise Anne Clark. (2011). "Compliance enforcement in regional fisheries management organizations to which Australia is a party." PhD diss., University of Tasmania, 38.

Hatcher, A., & Pascoe, S. (2006). Non-compliance and fisheries policy formulation. In Developments in aquaculture and fisheries science (Vol. 36, pp. 355-373). Elsevier.

Interview with the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Affairs of Indonesia in Jakarta on 3 February 2020

Jentoft, S. (2006). Beyond fisheries management: The Phronetic dimension. Marine Policy, 30(6), 671-680

Khan, A. M., Mill, A. C., Gray, T. S., Jiang, M., Arief, H., Brown, A., ... & Polunin, N. V. (2020). Reliability of the data on tuna catches obtained from the dockside in Indonesia: A study of stakeholders’ perceptions. Marine Policy, 122, 104242.

Levontin, P., Kulmala, S., Haapasaari, P., & Kuikka, S. (2011). Integration of biological, economic, and sociological knowledge by Bayesian belief networks: the interdisciplinary evaluation of potential management plans for Baltic salmon. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68(3), 632-638.

McIntyre, P. B., Reidy Liermann, C., Childress, E., Hamann, E. J., Hogan, J. D., Januchowski-Hartley, S. R., ... & Pracheil, B. M. (2016). Conservation of migratory fishes in freshwater ecosystems (pp. 324-360). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Miller, D. D., & Sumaila, U. R. (2014). Flag use behavior and IUU activity within the international fishing fleet: Refining definitions and identifying areas of concern. Marine Policy, 44, 210.

Oyanedel, R., Gelcich, S., & Milner‐Gulland, E. J. (2020). A synthesis of (non‐) compliance theories with applications to small‐scale fisheries research and practice. Fish and Fisheries, 21(6), 1120-1134.

Polacheck, T. (2012). Assessment of IUU fishing for southern bluefin tuna. Marine Policy, 36(5), 1150-1165.

Rahmawati, Novia Tri. (2014). Pengelolaan Kuota Penangkapan Tuna Sirip Biru Selatan di Indonesia. Institut Pertanian Bogor. 50.

Southern Bluefin Tuna-Species Impact Statement. (2009). available online from https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/_data/assets/pdf_file/0004/508018/southern_bluefin_tuna_sis_part_1.pdf

Tsamenyi, M., & Hanich, Q. (2012). Fisheries jurisdiction under the Law of the Sea Convention: rights and obligations in maritime zones under the sovereignty of Coastal States. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 27(4),793.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v7i2.2841

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Hasanuddin Law Review (ISSN Online: 2442-9899 | ISSN Print: 2442-9880) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Preserved in LOCKSS, based at Stanford University Libraries, United Kingdom, through PKP Private LOCKSS Network program.
 
Indexing and Abstracting:
 
  
 
View full indexing services.