CTA
Small fontsize
Medium fontsize
Big fontsize
English |
Switch to English
Français
Switch to French
Filter by Fisheries topics
Regions
Publication Type
Filter by date

Senegal–EU: Fight against IUU fishing as a basis for renewed relations

02 March 2014

A delegation from the European Union visited Dakar at the end of January “to reactivate relations in the fisheries between Senegal and the European Union”, as the previous fishing agreement protocol expired in 2006. Both parties think that “the best way to revitalise the relations in the fisheries sector is to totally rethink the legal framework”, as the current framework agreement dates back to the 1980s. This first meeting highlighted that the fight against IUU fishing, support for monitoring, control and surveillance, research and small-scale fisheries could all be part of an SFPA. This agreement “would also offer access to Senegalese waters for the tuna species as well as limited access to the deep-sea demersal species for the fleets of the European Union.”

This meeting comes after a Russian trawler, the Oleg Naydenov, was arrested by Senegalese authorities in early January for IUU fishing, highlighting both the political will of Senegal to combat IUU fishing, and the limitations of its current Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) capabilities. The Russian vessel, a repeat offender, was arrested for fishing without authorisation, close to the border with Guinea Bissau, where it does have authorisation to fish. This created diplomatic tension between Senegal, Russia and Guinea Bissau. At the end of January, the Russian company finally agreed to pay a considerable fine – various amounts were mentioned in the press – to release the vessel. The arrest of the vessel by the Senegalese navy was as a result of the deployment of a plane, offered by France for the surveillance of Senegalese fishing activities. The use of this plane has already led to the apprehension of five vessels fishing illegally.

Local fisheries stakeholders organised a forum in early January to discuss the fisheries situation and asked for more transparency, which should be done by a series of measures including the publication of all vessels having a licence. They also wished to be more involved in access negotiations with foreign fleets and/or countries. At the occasion of the president of the Republic’s visit to Kayar, one of Senegal’s main artisanal fishing centres, both the president and the fisheries minister highlighted that Senegal wants to reinforce the legislation to combat IUU fishing and to develop its control capabilities. A new regulation is already being prepared, foreseeing an increase in the amount of fines for illegal fishing and sanctions such as seizing of vessels. Meanwhile, a US NGO, Sea Shepherd, offered its vessel for a few months to patrol Senegalese waters. Senegalese fishermen themselves insisted that they can contribute to this effort by developing ongoing participative surveillance actions.

Editorial comment

Senegal and EU fisheries’ relations date back to the 1980s when Senegal was the first African country to sign a fishing agreement with the EU. EU companies have also been present in Senegal through joint ventures, and although the agreement protocol was not renewed in 2006, joint ventures with EU companies have continued to be set up: in recent months, a couple of EU trawlers, no longer permitted to fish in Mauritanian waters, were transferred under the Senegalese flag. The dialogue between Senegal and the EU, based on the reformed CFP principles (e.g. access to surplus only) and focusing on the joint fight against IUU, is a clear sign of the willingness from both parts to improve the situation. It also seems critical to find ways to ensure that what EU vessels do outside the potential future SFPA (e.g. reflagging) follow the same sustainability principles. In the short term, this calls for appropriate conditions to be included in the fishing authorisations delivered by EU member states, to avoid abusive reflagging. In the longer term, it may be useful for ACP countries and the EU to think about how to revive, in international forums, the debate concerning the responsibilities of the “state of beneficial ownership”, to ensure that those benefiting from fishing in ACP waters also bear the responsibilities and associated costs.

Comment

Terms and conditions