Nandan explained that the next task of the Conference is to address the second and third components of the mandate: means of improving fisheries cooperation among States and formulation of appropriate recommendations. To do this, he proposed that the Conference examine the issues listed in A/CONF.164/10. The delegates should take Item I (conservation and management measures) first, followed by II and III together, since they are related to regional arrangements. Items IV and V are both related to control and surveillance. Then Item VI (non-parties), VII (settlement of disputes) and VIII (compatibility between national and international conservation measures) will be addressed sequentially. Following the discussion, the Chair will put together a basic text.
Tunisia suggested that the Chair prepare a text at the end of the discussion of each item so it could be dealt with in an informal group, while the discussion continues in Plenary. This would allow greater transparency and involve all delegations. The Chair responded that there are only facilities for one meeting at a time so that a separate parallel meeting cannot be organized. He said that he will try his hand at a text and will welcome volunteers to meet with him in one of the smaller rooms to see if the text is balanced. In response to a question from Indonesia, he said that he did not know if three weeks would be enough, as this will depend on the acceptability of the text.
Peru commented that the mandate of the Conference does not preclude the possibility of an international legally binding agreement. In the absence of a legally binding agreement the coastal States have the right to regulate stocks in the high seas adjacent to their EEZ, either unilaterally or regionally, and adopt appropriate measures in order to avoid depletion. The Chair responded that it is inappropriate to discuss the outcome at this time; delegates should concentrate on substantive issues.
[Return to start of article]