Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific

MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC

SEVENTH SESSION

Honolulu, Hawai’i 30 August – 5 September 2000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT

Annex 1 List of participants

Annex 2 Opening remarks by the Chairman

Annex 3 Statements by delegations and observers

Annex 4 Information note on matters before the seventh session

Annex 5 Report of the Chairman on the credentials of representatives to the seventh session of the Conference

Annex 6 Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, Proposal by the Chairman

Annex 7 Final Act of the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean

Annex 8 Final Statement by the Chairman

Annex 9 Statements by delegations and observers upon the adoption of the Convention

Annex 10 Arrangement for the participation of fishing entities MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC

SEVENTH SESSION

Honolulu, Hawai’i 30 August – 5 September 2000

REPORT

1. The seventh session of the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific was held at Honolulu, Hawai’i from 30 August to 5 September 2000. The Conference was attended by representatives from Australia, Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, French Polynesia, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Chinese Taipei, Tonga, Tuvalu, United States of America, Vanuatu and Wallis and Futuna. Observers from Ecuador, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Forum Secretariat, the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), the Inter American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), the Pacific Community and the University of the South Pacific (USP) attended the Conference. The list of participants is attached as Annex 1.

2. The Conference was opened by prayers and a traditional Hawai’ian chant.

3. In his opening remarks, attached as Annex 2, the Chairman of the Conference, Ambassador Satya N. Nandan (Fiji), reminded participants that in 1997, the Conference made a commitment to conclude its work by June 2000. The Chairman noted that substantial progress had been made at the sixth session on a number of key issues, including the area of application, scientific advice, the observer programme, transhipment, boarding and inspection, compliance and enforcement, entry into force and financial arrangements. He recalled that the main outstanding issues were decision-making, participation by fishing entities and participation by territories. In addition, the Conference needed to give further consideration to the proposal for a Preparatory Conference pending entry into force of the Convention. The Chairman noted also that the seventh session had been declared as the final decision-making session of the Conference and that the working documents of the Conference would be the revised text issued by the Chairman at the end of the sixth session (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.1) and the revised text of the draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.3/Rev.2).

4. Statements were made by the representatives of Australia (on behalf of the Forum Fisheries Committee), Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, French Polynesia, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati (on behalf of the Parties to the Nauru Agreement), Korea, Nauru, New Caledonia, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Chinese Taipei, Tuvalu, United States of America, Vanuatu and Wallis and Futuna. Statements were made by the observers from Ecuador and IATTC. Statements made by delegations and observers are attached as Annex 3.

5. The Conference granted a request for observer status by an intergovernmental organization, OLDEPESCA. 6. From 30 August to 1 September, the Conference worked in small groups and informal sessions with a view to addressing the key issues identified in the Chairman’s information note, as well as other issues identified by delegations. Among the issues discussed in this manner were decision-making, the position of fishing entities, participation by territories, the northern sub-committee (article 11, paragraph 7) and transhipment. In addition, the Conference gave consideration to lists of issues submitted by the delegations of Japan and Korea, as well as a document submitted by Canada on the question of the area of application. Following deliberations on all outstanding issues, the Chairman issued on 2 September 2000, for consideration by the Conference, a revised text of the “Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.” (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.2). In the light of concerns raised by some delegations, the Chairman continued to hold informal consultations on outstanding issues in relation to the revised text and, on 3 September 2000, re-issued the text of the Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.” (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.2*).

7. The Conference also considered, in informal meetings, the revised text of the draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.3/Rev.2). As a result of the discussions, the Chairman further refined his proposal and, on 1 September 2000, issued a revised document under symbol MHLC/WP.3/Rev.3.

8. In accordance with the procedures outlined by the Chairman on the first day of the session, on 4 September 2000, the Chairman made a report to the plenary on the credentials of representatives attending the seventh session of the Conference. The report of the Chairman is attached as Annex 5. The Conference accepted the credentials of all representatives. The delegation of Japan expressed its reservation with respect to the acceptance by the Conference of the credentials of the delegation of Indonesia.

9. On 4 September 2000, the Chairman informed the Conference that all efforts at reaching general agreement had been exhausted. On the same date, the Chairman formally presented to the Conference the text of the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean as well as the draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the establishment of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. The Convention, together with the resolution, was adopted on 4 September 2000 by a vote of 19 in favour, 2 against (Japan and Republic of Korea), with three abstentions (China, France and Tonga).

10. On the same date, the Conference also adopted the Final Act of the Conference and a resolution expressing gratitude to the Governments of Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Japan and United States of America for hosting the sessions of the Conference.

11. The Convention, together with the Final Act, as adopted by the Conference are attached to this report as Annexes 6 and 7.

12. The Conference decided to resume its seventh session on 5 September 2000 for a ceremony of signature of the Convention and the Final Act.

13. On 5 September 2000, the Chairman delivered a final statement, attached as Annex 8. Statements were also made by the representatives of Australia (on behalf of the Forum Fisheries Committee and on its own behalf), Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Japan, Kiribati, Korea, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Chinese Taipei, Tuvalu, United States of America and Vanuatu. Statements were made by the observers from Ecuador and the FAO. Statements made by delegations and observers during the ceremonial session are attached as Annex 9.

14. The Convention was opened for signature on 5 September 2000. The Convention was signed by the representatives of Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Fiji Islands, Republic of the Marshall Islands, New Zealand, Republic of Palau, Republic of the Philippines, The Independent State of Samoa, Tuvalu, United States of America and Republic of Vanuatu.

15. Representatives of the following States signed the Final Act: Australia, Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Fiji Islands, France, Indonesia, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Republic of Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Republic of Palau, The Independent State of Papua New Guinea, Republic of the Philippines, Republic of Korea, The Independent State of Samoa, Solomon Islands, Kingdom of Tonga, Tuvalu, United States of America and Republic of Vanuatu. The Final Act was also signed by representatives of New Caledonia and Chinese Taipei.

16. In addition, on 5 September 2000, in accordance with the decision of the Conference, the representative of Chinese Taipei and the Chairman of the Conference signed an Arrangement for the Participation of Fishing Entities. The Arrangement is attached as Annex 10.

17. The Conference concluded its work on 5 September 2000.

- - - ANNEX 1 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Fiji Hiroyuki Nakamoto Regis Etaix-Bonnin Australia Ken Cokanasiga Masaaki Nakamura Laurent Ferriot Michael Bliss Maciu Lagibalavu Takanori Ohashi Maurice Ponga Mark Gray Satya Nandan Eiko Ozaki Neil Hughes Marieta Rigamoto Koichiro Sato New Zealand Hans Jusseit Lisa Stone Ken-ichi Shibasaki Falaniko Aukuso Geoff Miller Robert Stone Shinroko Sasaki Jan Henderson Peter Neave Tagicaki Silipa Shozo Takahashi Jennifer McIver Paula Shoulder Taina Tagicakibau Yuji Uozumi Talbot Murray Joe Thwaites Naoaki Usui Amanda-Jane Peter Ward France Yoshiko Yokota Riddell Anna Willock Philippe Penelope Ridings Courrouyan Kiribati Heather Scott Canada Xavier Dupont Johnny Kirata Vaughan Wilkinson Sandy Argue Alain Ferey Kaburoro Ruaia Nadia Bouffard Pierre Garrigue- Emile Schutz Niue Bill De Greef Guyonnaud Are Kristoffner Brendon Pasisi Peter De Greef Serge Segura Sydnes Ivan Ellingsen Rimeta Tinga Palau Lynne Ellingsen French Polynesia Herman Francisco Debbie Kay Alexandre Ata Republic of Korea James Kelleher Bill Shaw Guy Besnard Chang-Myeng Marcelino Melairei Howard Strauss Charles Daxboeck Byen Silas Orrukem James Moua Jae-kwon Kang Ramon Rechebei China Alain Moyrand Hyung-Nam Kim Mr. Fu Fachun Jung-Soo Kim Papua New Mr. Yanping Gao Indonesia Jong-Koo Lee Guinea Mr. Cui Guohui Hasjim Djalal Kwang-Se Lee Norman Barnabas Mr. Meng Jianjun Husein Ibrahim Ji-Doo Lee Lucy B. Bogari Mr. Zheng Kang R.P. Poernomo Gab-Riel Oh Maurice Brownjohn Mr Peng Rong Tao Raditya Poernomo Moo-Sung Park Ron Ganarafo Mr. Liu Xiaobing Dr. Purwanto Sung-Kwon Soh Simon Tiller Ms. Wang Xiaodu Sasmiyarsi Jae-Kwon Kang Mr. Zhang Xiaoli Sasmoyo Philippines Mr. Liu Zhenmin Marshall Islands Eva G. Betita Japan Maynard Alfred Jerry C. Damalerio Cook Islands Takero Aoyama Edward B. Bigler Avelino P. De Leon Ian Bertram Dan Goodman Doreen DeBrum Cesar M. Drilon, Colin Brown Yoshikatsu Jurelang Jnr. Navy Epati Hatakeyama Rhea Moss Alberto Joshua Mitchell Yasuo Iino Fred Muller Encomienda Edwin Pittman Yoshiaki Ito Atbi Riklon Eduardo G. Esteban Robert Woonton Seiji Kawamoto John Silk Minerva Jean A. Robert Worthington Masayuki Komatsu Danny Wase Falcon Shun-ichi Kuroki Ma. Gina H. Lu Federated States Kaoru Kurosawa Nauru Joaquin T. Lu of Micronesia Masakuzu Kusa Cyril Buramen Augusto C. Epel Ilon Shojiro Maki Ellington Dowbobo Natividad Eugene Pangelinan Shigeko Misaki Chitra Jeremiah Ronnel Rivera Lorin Roberts Akio Miyajima Anton Jimiwereiy Rodrigo E. Rivera Bernard Thoulag Satoshi Moriya Russell Kun Rodrigo C. Rivera, Anthony Welch Isamu Murakami Jnr. Daishiro Nagahata New Caledonia Malcolm I. Manumatavai Mike Tosatto Environment Sarmiento, Jnr. Tupou Ray Tulafono Programme Stanley Swerdloff Andrew Wright Richard L. Sy Tuvalu Vanuatu Marfenio Y. Tan Faimalaga Luka Moses Amos United Nations Domingo T. Teng Sikiona Luka Abel Nako Food and John Reynald M. Sautia Maluofenua Albert Ravutia Agriculture Tiangco Elisala Pita Paul Sami Organisation Francesa Tiu- Feleti P. Teo David Doulman Laurel Wallis & Futuna Francisco Tiu- United States of Patalione Kanimoa University of the Laurel, Jnr. America Pelena (Bernadette) South Pacific Louis Agard Papilio Laurence Samoa Violanda Botet Cordonnery Tuisugaletaua Janet Brown Sandra Tarte Sofala Aveau David Burney Observers Ueta Fa’asili Paul Callaghan Chairman Vitolio F. Lui Ray Clarke Ecuador Satya N. Nandan Albert Marnier Jim Cook Rafael Trujillo Mafasolia Papu Paul Dalzell Conference Vaai Eni F.H. IATTC Secretariat Faleomavaega Robin Allen Earl Cachola Solomon Islands Peter Flournoy Brian Hallman Vera Keala George Boape William Gibbons- Kevin Kelly Steve Kara Fly OLDEPESCA Cindy Knapman Albert Wata Mike Gonzales Carlos Mazal Blaise Kuemlangan Tom Grasso Michael Lodge Chinese Taipei Louis Hao Pacific Jarad Makaiau Paul W.L. Chang Dorothy Harris Community Mark Mitsuysu Hsi-Huang Chen Wayne Heikkila Tony Lewis Dan Pang Chu-Lung Chen Duncan Baker Martin Tsamenyi Ellen Reformina Huang-Chih Chiang Hollis Sylvia Spalding Chein-Te Fan Walter Ikehara Pacific Islands Alice Worthy Peter Shing-Chor Chuck Janisse Development Ho Charles Karnella Programme Andrew L.Y. Hsia Holly Koehler Kim Small Nien-Tsu Alfred Paul M. Krampe Hu Jo-Anne Kushima South Pacific Sing-Hwa Hu Mike Laurs Forum Fisheries Eric C.C. Huang Rebecca Lent Agency Jau-Yuan Hwang Dwight Mathers Transform Aqorau Daniel S.T. Kuo Tana McHale Les Clark Chung-Hai Kwoh Shannon Murphy Robert Gillet Charles C.P. Lee Paul Ortiz Barbara Hanchard Ding-Rong Lin Linda M.B. Paul Barry Pollock Wen-Cheng Gary Sakagawa Andrew Richards (Kevin) Lin Ray Sautter Len Rodwell Hui-Yin Lin Tucker Scully Victorio Uherbelau Kuo-Ching Pu Richard Seman Chi-Lu Sun Richard Shiroma South Pacific James T.P. Tsai Manuel Silva Forum Secretariat Kitty Simonds C.J. Stan Tonga Ed Stockwell Vandersyp ‘Akau’ola Dean Swanson Mafi ‘Akau’ola Joaquin Tenorio South Pacific Mike Testa Regional ANNEX 2

OPENING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRMAN, AMBASSADOR SATYA. N. NANDAN, TO THE SEVENTH SESSION OF THE MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE

30 August 2000

Excellencies, distinguished delegates, colleagues and friends,

It is my great pleasure and privilege to welcome you to the seventh and final session of the Multilateral High-level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Central and Western Pacific. Many of us have come to Honolulu so often now that we might consider ourselves kama’aina, that is, belongers, but those of you who are visiting Hawaii for the first time, we welcome you as malahine.

I would like to take this opportunity to express our thanks to the United States delegation and to the Western Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Council for agreeing at short notice to host the Conference once again in Hawaii. They have done so with their usual grace and efficiency which is personified by our good and dear friend Kitty Simonds and her very able team. I would like also to express the gratitude of the Conference to all those who have contributed funds for this session.

We will now have the invocation of this Conference in the traditional Hawaiian way but before we do so, allow me, if I may, to quote the inspirational words of King Kamehameha “ A ‘ohe hana nui ke alu ‘ia” ¾ that is, “no task is too great when done together”. With those wise words to inspire and guide us, I now invite the ceremonial invocation of this Conference.

Distinguished delegates,

This session will mark the culmination of our work, which began four years ago at Majuro when the participants in this Conference declared their commitment to establish a mechanism for conservation and management of the highly migratory fish stocks of the Central and Western Pacific in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement by adopting a treaty by June 2000. We have strived over the past four years to negotiate such a treaty. We have made steady progress in addressing all the issues involved in a fair and pragmatic manner taking into account all interests. In the process it was necessary to recognize that no interest, however important, is predominant and that the primary objective is to ensure the long- term sustainability of the resources. Over the past three years, with patience and perseverance, we have made considerable progress towards our objective so that at the end of the last session of the Conference in April this year one could fairly say that we had addressed most, if not all, of the issues.

In particular you will recall that during the last session we expended considerable effort to find solutions to the most difficult outstanding issues in order to enable us to meet the goal that was established at Majuro for the conclusion of this Conference. At this session it is my hope and expectation that we will remain faithful to that commitment. We will address the remaining issues and proceed to the adoption of the Convention.

Distinguished delegates,

With those considerations in mind, I had circulated to you all in July a note setting out the programme for this final session of the Conference and the three main issues that we needed to address in order to complete our work. Furthermore, I had invited you to meet with me here two days in advance of the official opening of the session to allow time for consultations on the remaining issues so that we have adequate opportunity to deal with them. It is fortuitous that we had this additional time available since some delegations have raised issues which we had not anticipated and to which we are obliged to give due consideration.

Given the circumstances, and taking into account that our work actually began two days earlier than anticipated, I believe we will have adequate time to address these additional issues within the programme of work that we had established. Distinguished delegates,

I wish now to turn to the programme of work over the next few days.

As I had explained in my information note, this first part of the session will consist of a three-day meeting of officials to finalize and adopt the Convention text and the resolution establishing the Preparatory Conference, as well as the Final Act of the Conference and the related institutional and administrative issues relating to the preparatory work for entry into force of the Convention. This will be followed by a two-day ministerial level meeting during which the Convention will be opened for signature.

For the purpose of adopting the draft Convention text, I wish to remind you that, as I stated at the end of the last session, it is my intention to work on the basis of standard procedures for multilateral conferences, the most appropriate example of which is to be found in the rules of procedure of the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (A/CONF.164/6). I propose therefore that those rules be applied, mutatis mutandis, to this Conference and that the Conference adopt a decision to that effect. The ideal goal, of course, would be to have the Convention and related instruments adopted by consensus, as is provided for in those rules. As far as possible, the Conference should conduct its work on the basis of general agreement. However, the Convention may be adopted by a vote if all efforts at achieving a consensus have been exhausted. It is in the nature of any Conference that every effort should be made to achieve consensus and at the same time to recognize that it may not always be achievable.

The Final Act of the Conference, which I mentioned earlier, is a factual record of the proceedings of the Conference. It does not contain substantive issues but rather indicates when the Conference began, how many times it met and where and who were the participants, as well as recording various procedural developments. A draft Final Act will be circulated to you all in due course. The resolution establishing the Preparatory Conference will be annexed to the Final Act and adopted at the same time. The Final Act would also be signed in order to authenticate the record of the proceedings.

Distinguished delegates,

There are a number of administrative and other matters that I wish to draw to your attention at this time.

I wish to inform you that I have received a written communication from the Government of the United Kingdom on behalf of Pitcairn Island concerning its participation in the Conference. I believe this has been circulated to all delegations. You also have before you along with the documentation for this session the separate communications received from Canada and from IATTC.

I also wish to inform you that I have received an application for observer status from an intergovernmental organization ¾ OLDEPESCA. I understand that this request has also been circulated to all delegations and I would invite the Conference to take a decision to formally accord the status of an observer to OLDEPESCA on the same terms and conditions as we had agreed for other observers.

Finally, there is the matter of credentials of representatives to this session of the Conference. As I had informed you in the information note, the credentials of representatives and the names of alternate representatives and advisers should be submitted to the Chairman of the Conference, if possible not later than 24 hours after the opening of the Conference. I would hope that this could be done through the Secretariat, as early as possible, in order that the credentials may be examined and a report made to the Conference in due course. Rather than appoint a committee for this purpose, in order to simplify the process, the Chairman, with the assistance of the Conference Secretary will provide a report to the Conference on the credentials received.

As you know, over the years, Mr Michael Lodge has been assisting me by performing the tasks of the Secretary of the Conference. I would like to formalize Mr Lodge’s designation as the Secretary for the purposes of this Conference.

Distinguished delegates, Over the past two days we have been considering the main outstanding issues in informal meetings convened by the Chairman. We have met in larger groups and in small groups. I would like to continue with that practice until we have addressed all the issues and I am in a position to report to you all on the progress. I believe that at this stage that is the most efficient way to proceed. It is my intention to issue a revised text of the Convention and related documents by Thursday evening or Friday morning in order to give opportunity to you to review the text before we proceed to adoption.

Distinguished delegates,

I thank you for your cooperation in the past few days and I hope that I can count on your continued support and cooperation over the remaining few days. For my part it is my intention to give you every opportunity to address the outstanding issues so that we may reach a conclusion.

– – – ANNEX 3

OPENING STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS AND OBSERVERS

Australia (on behalf of FFC Chair)

It is my honour, as current Chair of the Forum Fisheries Committee, to deliver the following statement on behalf of the sixteen members of the Forum Fisheries Agency. I wish to thank the United States Government, the Government of Hawaii and the Western Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Council for the excellent meeting arrangements prepared at such short notice.

The tuna fishery in the western and central Pacific is the world’s last great tuna fishery. The bulk of the catch of this fishery is taken inside the EEZs of FFA member countries, who wish to maintain and enhance their management responsibilities for this fishery. FFA member countries are determined to ensure the long-term sustainability of these fisheries resources for future generations and, for many, as a central pillar of their economic development.

The MHLC represents recognition of the need for a cooperative regime for highly migratory tuna stocks in the western and central Pacific, that will include both coastal and fishing States. We should recall that UNCLOS in 1982 established the rights and duties of coastal States to conserve and manage living resources in the EEZ, and to cooperate to that effect with fishing nations. But unregulated fishing on the high seas has meant continued global overfishing and the collapse of significant fisheries. Because UNCLOS did not address the biological unity of the stocks and the interrelationships of high seas and in-zone fisheries, the UN Fish Stocks Agreement was concluded in 1995, containing a comprehensive list of conservation and management principles, including the obligation to create regional fisheries management organisations where these did not exist. MHLC7 represents the culmination of work that commenced at the first meeting in December 1994 at Honiara, Solomon Islands and has proceeded with a high priority for FFA member countries, and under your wise guidance, through the intervening sessions.

FFA member countries have, throughout the process, sought to produce a text that reflects a fair balance between the interests of coastal and fishing States, while ensuring effective conservation and management. In reaching this balance, participants should recall the adoption of the Majuro Declaration at Majuro, Marshall Islands in 1997. In that declaration, FFA member countries and the fishing States represented here, together committed themselves firmly and unambiguously to establish a mechanism for conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in accordance with UNCLOS and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and the principles they contain, including the precautionary approach. This process was to be completed by June 2000.

We are deeply concerned by the actions of some delegations that are signatories to the UN Fish Stocks Agreement, but appear intent on using this negotiation to weaken and undercut the provisions of that agreement, which as signatories they are obliged to protect and which is the basis on which our work has to proceed.

Although we are two months past our deadline, FFA member countries came to MHLC7 with the expectation that the draft Convention would be finalised and agreed as envisaged at Majuro. Years of negotiations and the fulfilment of collective legal, practical and moral responsibilities to manage and conserve an irreplaceable resource of enormous value to us all depend upon our work over the next few days.

Mr. Chairman, I would now like to provide some comments on specific issues that are fundamental to the desired outcomes for FFA member countries.

In relation to the Convention Area, FFA member countries, would much prefer demarcated boundaries, but are prepared to accept the current text. The Convention Area must focus on the western and central Pacific, and for this reason, FFA member countries have reservations about any proposal to extend the eastern boundary past 150 degrees west. In taking this stance on the area as a whole, the need for close cooperation with the IATTC is recognised, as well as with the IOTC as required.

In respect to proposals to move the boundary to the south, the FFA member countries would want to ensure that the principle of compatibility applies throughout the full range of the stocks. On the difficult, but fundamental question of decision-making, it is essential for FFA member countries to be able to protect their interests against the economic and political power of fishing States through fair decision-making and dispute resolution procedures that are legally binding on all Commission members. The current draft Convention represents a significant compromise on the part of FFA member countries, from an initial position, where consensus proves unattainable, of decision making by two-thirds, then to three-quarters, then a four-fifths majority. We have also reluctantly accepted an increased list of mandatory consensus issues. FFA member countries are not in a position to make further compromises as they consider any further dilution of the decision-making provisions would make the management regime unworkable.

In particular, FFA member countries remain opposed to any opt-out provision and to any extension of the mandatory consensus provisions. Decisions should only be reviewable if they are unjustifiably discriminatory or inconsistent with this Convention, LOSC or the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. Given the concessions already made by FFA member countries, if the fishing States continue to insist on substantial changes to weaken the existing decision- making provisions, then FFA member countries will have to revert to the provisions in the draft Convention at the conclusion of MHLC5, requiring only a two-thirds majority on all decisions where consensus cannot be achieved and removing the requirement for consensus on allocation.

We cannot accept the notion that some countries in the region should demand special rights, as if their interests and wishes should take precedence over others. Any arrangement based on that premise would deny the sovereign equality of States represented here, and is contrary to the spirit of collective responsibility and common interests that are the foundation of this endeavour.

Mr. Chairman, the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) is a vital provision on which FFA member countries have compromised considerably. The current provision relating to transmission of data to the Commission and simultaneously to the flag State where it is so required, provides for both the rights of flag States to this data and the need for effective management under the Convention. We have heard no convincing reason to deny direct transmission to the Commission and to do so would inevitably leave questions about the reliability of the data and reduce the Convention’s effectiveness. The confidentiality concerns of flag States are also catered for under the current draft Convention.

Article 18 on financial arrangements was accepted by MHLC6 and is supported by FFA member countries since it deals fairly with funding from assessed and voluntary contributions, a fund to provide for special assistance to developing countries and fees for specific services such as cost-recovery. It also allows for the Commission to decide on a scheme for assessing contributions, with each member paying a basic contribution, a fee based on national wealth, and a variable fee based on total catch taken by the member’s vessels. Activity related costs, e.g. VMS, observer programme and fishing vessel register, should be assessed against members whose fishing activity gives rise to such costs, on a cost-recovery basis. They should not be borne by all members from the assessed contributions.

On the question of participation by territories, FFA member countries remain very sympathetic to such participation, consistent with the legal and functional abilities of the territories to discharge their obligations.

Mr. Chairman, the positions I have outlined have been reached by FFA member countries after careful consideration and recognition of the need to compromise in order to reach a fair and balanced outcome for all participants. Throughout the entire MHLC process, the FFA member countries have negotiated in good faith, with deep respect for, and adherence to LOSC and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. The former is already in force while the latter has been signed by all fishing States.

As I noted earlier, FFA member countries have repeatedly compromised and made concessions on key issues in order to find agreement. FFA member countries had expected that these compromises would be respected, and not used at MHLC7 as a starting point for new demands by fishing States. The approach recently taken by certain delegations undermines the significant progress made in our deliberations and threatens the timely completion of the undertakings made at Majuro. Mr. Chairman, the successful conclusion of this phase of the MHLC process is urgent and in our common interest. Failure to achieve agreement would have far-reaching consequences for the future management of this resource that is considered vital to coastal and fishing States alike. The member countries of FFA are ready to work hard and cooperatively with you and all the delegations here to ensure the success we need at this final session. FFA member countries came to MHLC7 ready to sign the Convention. We have Ministers who are coming here to sign and we are expecting to sign, as scheduled, early next week.

-----

Canada

On behalf of my delegation, let me say how happy we are to be back in Hawaii for the seventh and final MHLC session. We are grateful to the U.S. authorities for again hosting the negotiations.

We look forward to working with you and the other delegations to resolve the outstanding issues that stand in the way of a convention that provides for the conservation and management of highly migratory species in the western and central Pacific Ocean, and implements the 1995 UN Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks.

That said, there remains one issue of particular concern to Canada: the conservation and management of northern albacore. This stock is important to Canadian fishermen.

In a paper that we circulated to all delegations, we have indicated the unique characteristics that, in our view, warrant the MHLC taking on the conservation and management of northern albacore throughout its range. We consider that such decision is critical to the northern albacore stock and its associated jig fisheries and is consistent with the philosophy of both the 1995 Agreement and the Convention that we are concluding here. Such decision is cost-free for most of the States participating in this negotiation. The costs would be borne by northern States. Our concerns would not be satisfied should the IATTC eventually extend its boundary area north to 50 degrees, a decision that is far from certain as the IATTC text is still being negotiated. If we do not cover northern albacore throughout its range and the IATTC does not extend its boundary north to 50 degrees, a very dangerous “donut hole” will exist. If the IATTC does extend its boundary north to 50 degrees, we risk one stock and one fishery being subjected to two very different management regimes. We can address these problems by deciding to cover northern albacore throughout its range.

When we adopted the Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks at the UN in 1995, we reached one very important plateau. That agreement is now close to entering into force. The Canadian delegation worked closely at that time with the States represented here. We are happy to work with delegations at this session to reach the next plateau and establish a regional fisheries management organization for the western and central Pacific Ocean. We look forward to continuing to work together to implement this Convention and we look forward to its early entry into force.

----- China

On behalf of the delegation of China, I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation and thanks to the Government of the United States of America for hosting the Multilateral High Level Conference for the fourth time in this beautiful city of Honolulu.

Mr. Chairman, six years has elapsed since the beginning of the MHLC, during which all participants have worked hard and done their best to promote the birth of a convention on the conservation and management of fish stocks in the central and western Pacific. The current session has been intended to be the final session but is faced with plenty of work with a number of issues outstanding. Though there are still differences among delegations on some issues, the delegation of China hopes that current negotiation could take into account concerns of all participants and make progress in the finalization of the text of the Convention. China supports the establishment of an appropriate regime for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the central and western Pacific. My delegation will do its best to cooperate with you in the effort to achieve the objective of the current session of MHLC.

Mr. Chairman, the negotiation of the Convention is stepping into a key conjecture at this moment. My delegation would like to share with you and other participants some brief comments:

Nature of the negotiation

The current negotiation for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific was initiated and has been carried out on the basis of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention and the 1995 United Nations Implementation Agreement. The negotiation is an inter-governmental one and the future institution to be established by the Convention will be an inter-governmental commission. The delegation of China has agreed to invite the relevant fishing entity to participate in the meeting from the beginning of the MHLC taking into account the fishing interests of the fishing entity in the region. But this does not mean that the nature of the negotiation is changed; this does not mean that my delegation agrees to the view of giving fishing entities equal status with other participants. You have stated at the fourth session of MHLC that participation of Chinese Taipei fishing entity in the meeting is not intended to determine its relationship with the future regime of the Commission. My delegation would like to reiterate that the inter-governmental nature will have to be preserved in the Convention and the regime to be established by the Commission.

The Convention Area

The delegation of China could go along with the current formulation on the eastern and southern limits of the future Convention Area, but my delegation is not satisfied with the description of the Convention Area in respect of the western limit. My delegation is of the view that exclusion of the South China Sea from the Convention Area should be manifestly recorded in an appropriate form. Regarding the northern limit of the Convention Area, my delegation still prefers that the northern limit should not go beyond 20 degrees parallel of north latitude.

Decision-making mechanism

The delegation of China has taken note of the differences among the delegations concerned regarding the issue of decision-making. My delegation considers the decision-making issue vital to both the operation of the future Commission and the effectiveness of the regime. My delegation is of the view that final solution to the issue of decision-making should be aimed at preserving an appropriate balance between coastal interests and fishing interests and should serve to promote cooperation among all the partners in the Convention Area taking into account various interests.

Preparatory Conference

The delegation of China is of the view that the work of the Preparatory Conference should focus on the promotion of the entry into force of the Convention and the establishment of the Commission. The Preparatory Conference should not be involved in adopting any mandatory conservation and management measures. If it considers necessary to recommend provisional conservation and management measures, such measures shall be applied on a voluntary basis.

Issue of fishing entities

I would like to make it clear that my delegation cannot accept the formulation on the issue of fishing entities in the current text of the draft Convention. The issue of fishing entities has been originated from the 1995 United Nations Implementation Agreement (UNIA). In accordance with UNIA, the issue of fishing entities should be deferred until the Commission is established for its consideration. In view that my delegation has agreed to invite the fishing entity to participate in the MHLC, my delegation is prepared to join the effort in making appropriate arrangement for fishing entities to participate in the future regime of the Convention for the purpose of both ensuring fishing entities bound by the conservation and management measures of the Convention and safeguarding the interests of fishing entities. However, my delegation cannot accept the view that the issue of fishing entities is a bilateral political issue; my delegation cannot accept the attempt to raise the political status of fishing entities; and my delegation cannot accept the move of some people to use the issue of fishing entities for other interests. Fishing is a commercial business. No matter how large the fishing fleet is, fishing is an industry. Fishing entities’ interests is fishing. Fishing entities should not become a political movement. My delegation firmly believes that, as the Convention is intended to provide for the conservation and management measures for highly migratory fish stocks in western and central Pacific, all the fishing fleets should be bound by these measures but the Convention should not become an opportunity for fishing entities to raise status. Fishing entities could be involved in the work of the Commission but can do so only in the capacity of observer. My delegation believes that, if all those concerned could leave the political motivation aside and focus efforts in the conservation and management of fish stocks, it would not be difficult to find an arrangement on the issue of fishing entities. My delegation is prepared to join the effort in finding a solution to the issue and will take a flexible approach without giving up its basic positions.

-----

Cook Islands

Since 1994 the Cook Islands has had an intimate involvement in the MHLC negotiations. We have come to this session with the expectation that final arrangements will be agreed to and that an agreement will be signed by our Ministers early next week.

We are therefore extremely disappointed with the recent position now adopted by certain distant water fishing interests.

Over the years we have negotiated in good faith, making concessions in the interests of coming to an arrangement acceptable to all. As it stands, Mr. Chairman, the current draft represents a multitude of concessions by us and I must say, is a set of words barely acceptable to us.

Our primary concern is to ensure the stocks of fish which exist in our region are managed and conserved for the benefit of us all. We have an obligation to ensure that future generations are able to enjoy and benefit from the bountiful harvests of the oceans.

It is our earnest hope that good faith and flexibility are qualities that we will all display over the next few days. It is therefore my delegation’s aim, Mr. Chair, to use this final session constructively in order to complete the work.

-----

Federated States of Micronesia On behalf of the Federated States of Micronesia delegation, please allow me to join previous speakers in thanking our good Hawaiian friends, the management and staff of the Western Pacific Fisheries Management Council in particular, for their hospitality and for the excellent arrangements made for the conference.

I would also like to thank you Mr. Chairman and your support staff for your leadership throughout the MHLC process. We especially appreciate your efforts in moving the process forward up to this seventh session to be within the three-year time frame we set for ourselves in June 1997 in Majuro.

Mr. Chairman, we fully support the statements earlier made by Australia, our FFC Chairman, and Kiribati, Chair of the PNA. We are mindful that a number of issues are still outstanding pending firm decisions by this conference. We are however encouraged and satisfied with the progress, thus far, in respect to the current draft text. This is indeed a reflection of a greater appreciation of our differences and of the difficult issues before us. But despite these difficulties, and guided by our commitment to conclude a comprehensive conservation and management arrangement, we are determined, confident, and strong in our resolve.

Mr. Chairman, we are particularly pleased with the progress made in respect to decision-making. The current draft text represents, in our view, a fair balance of the interests and views expressed by many delegations, moving us closer to reaching agreement on this most difficult and protracted issue.

We have come a long way to get this far in the negotiation. This may very well be the point of testing our political will. We believe that a good outcome can be achieved and is doable, but only with a higher level of cooperation and degree of commitment than before.

Mr. Chairman, the Federated States of Micronesia has a long history of granting fisheries access to foreign fishing fleets to our zone, and in the process, we have come to appreciate the crucial need to include all fishing vessels in any conservation and management regime if it is to be successful. We fully recognize the desire to provide as full participation as possible for all interested stakeholders in the region.

In this respect, Mr. Chairman, while we continue to urge delegations concerned to show flexibility on fishing entity issues, it is our strong belief that any new formulation must be consistent with international law and in accords with prevailing customary practice of other comparable inter-governmental agreements or organizations. For participation of all interested stakeholders in the region, while we are sympathetic to their efforts to secure their survival, such participation must be consistent with international treaty practice.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your able leadership in this most important negotiation process.

-----

Fiji

It is an honor to be welcomed here, to this final meeting of the MHLC. For my delegation in particular, we accept the welcome with deep humility. As you know, we were to have hosted this meeting, but for the political situation in my country at that time, Fiji deeply regrets that we could not host this meeting and we therefore especially thank the Government of the United States of America and the State of Hawaii for their offer to host this session at a very short notice. Fiji also acknowledges the generous contributions of Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei, and all other Organizations.

Mr. Chairman, the Government and the People of Fiji would also like to pay particular tribute and proudly thank you for your leadership, expertise and guidance in the MHLC process including its conclusion for which we are assembled here today.

Mr. Chairman, Fiji was first to sign ’The United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)’, Fiji was party to all the sessions of the United Nations Implementing Agreement negotiations in New York – the global forerunner to the MHLC process. Mr. Chairman, when we concluded the negotiations on UNIA in New York, the Pacific Island States represented made a call to their global partners to make good their obligations as set out in that Agreement. It would therefore, Mr. Chairman, be appropriate to again remind our partners of that call. After all, these global instruments were to provide the framework for regional and sub-regional conservation measures.

Fiji remains deeply committed to the MHLC process and its objectives. The tuna resources of the region, Mr. Chairman, have been a major source of employment and foreign earnings for my country and offers great potential for economic development. Commissioned studies have reconfirmed this.

Mr. Chairman, three years ago in Majuro, Marshall Islands, we all pledged our full support to the establishment of a conservation and management regime under the Majuro Declaration. We also gave ourselves a specific time frame to finalize these arrangements.

Mr. Chairman, with six substantive sessions in the last four years, the task we had set ourselves has indeed been a daunting one. However, we all knew of the challenges that were ahead us before we embarked on this mission. We have had disagreements; some were serious and others trivial. But this is to be expected with the nature of the task at hand.

The highly migratory fish stocks that the negotiated regime is to administer traverse through a lot of political and sovereign boundaries. Fiji, apart from being a coastal State, has licensed vessels of different nationalities, all geared towards the harvest of these highly migratory stocks. The harvest capabilities of these fleets are neither related to their State of origin, nor do their nationalities dictate the effort they put into their operation. It is for the sustainability of these resources, that Fiji supports the application of the agreed conservation and management regime to all vessels operating in the region.

We have managed to be where we are today through the spirit of mutual cooperation, jovial attitude of give and take, and indeed, a deep commitment and resolve to accomplishing the objectives we had set ourselves.

As with our “family” from this region, we have throughout the sessions placed our cards on the table. We are mindful of our commitment that we pledged to the parties when we began our journey, and are determined to see it through. Fiji has come to this session ready to sign and ratify the Convention.

Mr. Chairman, Fiji had in the past offered to host the Commission headquarters. While the recent events in Fiji may have changed some people’s perception of the country, I would like to reaffirm to this forum and to you distinguished delegates that this is a misconception. This is true for otherwise I would not be here. Fiji is now on the path to economic and political recovery. In this regard, Mr. Chairman, there are internationally accepted principles which I am pleased to confirm are being fulfilled:

· Law and Order has been fully restored as those involved in the May 19th event are currently facing the full brunt of the law;

· The Interim administration has a definite timetable to return the country to Constitutional rule in 2 years within a national reconciliation framework;

· Fiji is still within the UN system;

· No diplomatic relations have been severed, all international, regional organizations and foreign embassies in Suva are operating normally;

· Our fishing fleet and fishery has not been affected;

· Tourism has resumed normally with travel advisories from major tourism sources such as Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the USA being up-lifted; · Normal trade and economic relations are in place.

Mr. Chairman, I have spoken at length on the above issues to assure this distinguished gathering that Fiji remains committed to its international and regional obligations.

The Government and the People of Fiji still stand by its offer to host the Commission Headquarters. We believe that logistically, Fiji is ideally located for its placement. I therefore request that the qualifying criteria and selection process be transparent and that the issue be resolved at a latter stage in accordance with the Resolution of this meeting.

In addition, Mr. Chairman, I am positive that most of us around the table would have heard about the “Pacific Village” proposal made by Fiji at the Committee for Representatives of Governments and Administrations (CRGA) and the annual SOPAC meeting. We have included the Commission headquarters as one of the regional organizations to be housed in the Pacific Village. The Government of Fiji will commit funds in next years budget for the initial construction works. For those who are interested, I am pleased to submit a sketch of the proposed “Pacific Village”.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, the Sea is part and parcel or our being. While “fish” may only be a tradable commodity to our partners, to us, this is the lifeline for our future generations. It is part of our tradition, our history, heritage and culture. Indeed, it is part of our spirit and soul. In short, Mr. Chairman, we are giving up a part of us in this Convention. We therefore call on our partners to recognize, value and respect this.

-----

France

First of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks to the U.S. Government and to the Hawaiian Authorities for, once again, hosting this meeting. We are particularly grateful to them for the excellent facilities provided to us. I wish also to express our thanks to you, Mr. Chairman, and your team for your hard work and your commitment in this exercise. We do appreciate your wisdom and skill, paving the way towards the establishment of an effective conservative and management regime in the western and central Pacific.

However, as you all know, our objective is ambitious although necessary and some difficult issues have still to find appropriate solutions. Among them is the status of the French territories within the future Commission.

We want to make clear that the present draft, as it stands, suits us completely.

As we have understood from our last meeting, most of the other delegations share the same views and only a few disagree.

Following your recommendation, Mr. Chairman, at the end of the MHLC6, we had a meeting in Paris with the U.S. delegation on July 6th to which the Territories fully participated. Many questions were raised, many clarifications given.

Let me go back to the Noumea Agreement on New Caledonia which will be followed by another agreement with French Polynesia. One of the major elements of this new status is precisely to transfer external competencies to the Territory in some matters among them conservation and management of fisheries.

To recognize in the present draft a right of participation including vote on matters of their competencies to New Caledonia and later to French Polynesia is consistent with the letter and the spirit of the Agreement and reflects the diversity of evolving statutes existing in the Pacific area.

We are open to a possible compromise provided that the participation of the French Territories including the right of vote on issues of their competencies is ensured. An effective participation in matters of their competence is the long awaited wish of the Peoples of New Caledonia and French Polynesia. Their new competencies should not be denied at the first occasion when they can see their rights recognized at the international level. This is a very important issue for us which should find a solution in the “Pacific way”. We are willing to participate fully in the consultations on this question with all our partners in a constructive spirit.

Other issues are on the table. I would like to assure you, Mr. Chairman, that my delegation will contribute as fully as possible to work with others for acceptable solutions for all.

As far as practical issues have to be discussed, for example the future site of the Commission, my inclinations would be to agree first on a provisional system to be in place in cooperation with existing bodies and then to reopen the debate at a later stage.

Mr. Chairman, we have reached a stage that requires us to be open minded in our approach as we proceed towards forging an acceptable text.

Mr. Chairman, we have full confidence in your ability to guide us on this path.

-----

French Polynesia

My delegation wishes to express some amazement at this particular time of our gathering. We have read surprising words and heard astonishing statements regarding French Polynesia’s participation in the in-coming Organization: horror stories about a multiplayer effect; of frightful hostage syndrome outcomes; horrifying consequences of forthcoming blackmail; of entire fishing fleets starving of hunger because of forbidden catches; even startling questions concerning Tahiti’s irresponsibility or of it not acting sensibly.

Mr. Chairman, perhaps some common sense ought to be instilled here.

I would first refer to the Majuro Declaration which states, quote “the States, territories and fishing entities (…) decide (art. 3) to ensure that the fishing activities in the region are conducted in a manner fully consistent with the respective rights, obligations and responsibilities of coastal States and territories” unquote.

My delegation also wishes to refer to our governing law which states quite clearly in its Article 7, quote “the Territory of French Polynesia is empowered to regulate and it exercises its right to explore and to exploit all resources of the surrounding EEZ and territorial waters” unquote. The policy-making authority is the Territory, thus justifying our right to vote, which we are seeking.

Well then, let us, all of us who are caretaker of the most precious resource for now, and for future generations, sit down for good and do business. Long standing trading partners in the area should understand that overfishing whatever the supposedly insufferable legalities are, can only give way to unproductive results.

What is needed here, simply put, is fairness and good faith.

In closing, I wish to thank members of FFA for the sympathy they have expressed during their recent meeting.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman for your guidance and efforts in the above matters.

-----

Indonesia On behalf of the Indonesian delegation, I would like, first of all, to thank the U.S. Government and the Government of Hawaii for hosting this meeting again in Honolulu. I would also like to thank the MHLC secretariat as well as you personally, Mr. Chairman, and other organisations that have made this meeting and our participation possible. I would also like to appreciate other delegations that have cooperatively supported the effort in taking into account our common interest in the Convention.

We consider that the draft Convention has been drafted to implement the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, particularly Article 64, taking into account the UNIA 1995. Mr. Chairman, even though Indonesia has not ratified the UNIA yet, we have no objection to base our discussion on the UNIA and understand the importance of this Agreement in providing the framework for the Convention. Indonesia is now in the process of ratifying the UNIA.

In general, we believe that the draft Convention meets the wishes of all of us in general way, although we may have some problems with some of its detailed provisions. We are, therefore, in the position to recommend it to our Government.

We understand and have recorded the statement of the Chairman that the Convention only applies to the waters of the Pacific Ocean and does not include the waters of the South China Sea and South-East Asia that are not part of the Pacific Ocean, thus it does not include, inter alia, the Indonesian archipelagic waters.

We appreciate every effort made by you, Mr. Chairman, in taking into account the views and positions of all delegations. We commend all your effort in the very difficult negotiation. We are particularly unhappy, however, that some of the important fishing nations or entities have declared disappointment with the draft of the Convention. We understand their concerns. We believe that they, having important fishing activities in the Pacific, should participate in the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. We believe that their participation is essential in making the Convention workable and effective.

We hope that, after careful consideration, they would still find that the text would meet most, if not all, of their concerns. It should be realized that on issues like this compromises are essential. We should consider that the common interest of conservation and management as well as sustainable utilization of the resources for all the people of the Pacific Ocean should be paramount in our consideration.

The fact that we may not be able to sign the Convention today or tomorrow does not signify our lack of support to this Convention. It is simply due to the fact that in our case a special full-power is required for that purpose which so far has not yet arrived in Honolulu.

----- Japan

On behalf of the Japanese delegation, I wish to express my thanks to the Government of the United States and the State of Hawaii for the warm welcome to this meeting.

Mr. Chairman, Japan strongly supports the efforts made by all delegations to create a regime to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable use of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific for present and future generations.

Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the composition of my delegation to this meeting reflects a strong will to create an effective conservation and management regime.

Mr. Chairman, given that we are now in the final phase of the MHLC negotiations, we have carefully reviewed the existing text in Tokyo. On the basis of that review, we believe that a number of modifications are necessary to achieve our common objectives in this effort. Japan, a major fishing nation in the region, recognizes that its ideas have not been adequately reflected in the text though it has offered so far quite a few constructive comments/proposals for changes of text. It is therefore most important, in view of the significance of the establishment of a proper regime in the western and central Pacific, for the delegations to review and address the concerns that have emerged from our review of the text. If they were not important, we would not be in this rather strange position. However, after careful consideration, I have decided to speak up on what we see in the text, in order to avoid any problems that might arise in the near future.

Mr. Chairman, I have no intention to address here all of the points that Japan has, but I would like to highlight what we see are some of the fundamental issues to be addressed. These include decision-making procedures, the exclusion of the area of North Pacific from the Convention Area, flag-State-based compliance and enforcement measures, and dispute settlement procedure.

First, we remain concerned about the decision-making procedure. The existing decision-making mechanism is not designed to adequately provide security for the minority, that is to say, the Distant Water Fishing Nations ( DWFNs), in a balanced and equitable manner in spite of the fact that the DWFNs have contributed greatly to the region in financial terms, both in terms of fishing fees and development assistance. Whatever the decision-making procedure, the inclusion of objection clause is essential to protect the interests and rights of DWFNs. But I would like to stress that Japan, as a responsible fishing nation, has no intention to abuse the objection procedure. A regime which forces a country with a minority view to be legally bound to decisions made by the majority on important issues, would be unlikely to receive approval by our legislators.

Second, Japan considers that the area of the Pacific north of the 20 degree parallel of north latitude should be excluded from the Convention Area, given that fishing patterns and practices in the Pacific are quite different from that of the South Pacific, socio-economically, culturally, and traditionally and that there is a strong scientific evidence that major tuna stocks are distributed mainly in the Northwestern Pacific. In this regards, we are inclined to start to create a regime for long-term conservation and sustainable use of highly migratory fish stocks in the North Pacific.

Third, we consider that compliance and enforcement measures on the high seas should be flag-state-based and should not go beyond the principles of UNCLOS. We expect that boarding and inspection scheme on the high seas, regional observer programme and VMS should avoid excessive and unnecessary operational and economic burdens.

Fourth, with respect to interpretation or application of the dispute settlement procedure, Japan believes that a dispute arising between two or more of the parties concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention should be resolved within the framework of the MHLC, and if any dispute would not be so resolved, it should be referred for settlement to the ICJ/ITLOS/arbitration with the consent of all parties to the dispute concerned. Japan expects that this idea should be adequately observed in the final text.

Mr. Chairman, there are a number of other issues that also are of great importance to my delegation, such as the species to be covered, dealing with non-target species, the modality of scientific research, overlapping areas with other convention areas, such as IOTC, IATTC, CCSBT, and others. All these substantial issues are closely related to each other and it is not an easy task to work out solutions for these points during the meeting.

Having said all that again, Mr. Chairman, I very seriously urge all delegations to carefully scrutinize and consider a number of provisions of the text. My delegation wishes to work closely and constructively with all delegates to improve the existing text, with a view to achieving a mutually acceptable solution.

-----

Kiribati (On behalf of PNA countries)

Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you on behalf of the Parties to the Nauru Agreement for giving me the opportunity to make this statement.

Mr. Chairman, FFA member countries have already made their position clear in relation to the outstanding issues that were identified in the lead up to MHLC7. The PNA countries, where the majority of the stocks are caught, fully support the statement made by the FFC Chair.

The PNA group strongly believes that the draft text finalised at the conclusion of MHLC6 represents a good balance between the interests of coastal States and distant water fishing nations. In reaching this point in negotiations, the Pacific island countries have made major concessions on several issues, particularly in relation to the key issues of decision-making, area of application, and compliance and enforcement provisions. The PNA group finds it unacceptable that some of us would wish to turn the clock back not only in relation to these issues, but also in relation to several others that many participants considered had already been adequately addressed in previous sessions.

Mr. Chairman, the PNA group, and indeed all FFA member countries, have negotiated in good faith throughout the MHLC process. We would like to encourage those of us who have not done so to do the same because it is becoming evident that not all participants have done the same.

The tuna resources of the western and central Pacific are fundamental to the economic future of the PNA group. It is therefore important to the group that the tuna resources in question are protected for long term sustainable use. It would be very sad to see that whilst we are working hard to conclude a convention that ensures maximum protection for sustainable use of the tuna resources, some of us are more preoccupied with the need to safeguard their own individual interests. The primary focus of our undertaking is to effectively safeguard the tuna resources in our area so that we can continue to benefit from them in the long-term future. This is why it is equally important that a convention is finalised that ensures the Commission, once established, can operate effectively to manage these resources.

The PNA group believes therefore that any changes that undermine the effectiveness of the Commission would not be in the best interests of its members.

Another important issue that will need to be considered is the location of the Preparatory Conference and ultimately the Commission. The PNA group strongly believes that the Preparatory Conference, in particular the Commission, should be located in the FFA region which is a major tuna fishing area of the western and central Pacific. The objective of the Convention should be sufficient to remind us that where the stocks occur most in our area has direct relationship with the location of the Commission.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, the PNA group is prepared to conclude the Convention during this session. We can not afford to continue to re-visit issues which have been adequately addressed in previous sessions, nor accept the introduction of new items which would have the effect of undermining the objective of the Convention.

----- Republic of Korea

I would like to thank the U.S. and Hawaiian State Government for again hosting the MHLC meeting. I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to Ambassador Nandan who has done a lot to coordinate differing interests of the countries, and to the staff who have been working to ensure this conference runs smoothly.

We, the participating States and entities, have endeavored to resolve conflicting interests of countries with different fishery environments throughout the six conferences. Unfortunately, however, there are still many outstanding issues to be solved. I would daresay that these disagreements arise from the lack of will and effort of the participating countries to harmonize the position of each country.

Reflecting back on past meetings, it seems to me that many changes have been made to the Convention draft in the absence of clear and understandable rules of procedure for decision-making. We regret that several issues raised by our delegation in the past were not given due consideration, and thus are not reflected in the existing draft. I would like to strongly assert that this kind of approach is not desirable in achieving our common goal of establishing conservation measures and optimum utilization of migratory fish stocks within the Convention Area.

On behalf of the Korean Government, I would like to make the following points which must be incorporated into the Convention at least for Korea to support the adoption of the Convention and ultimately become a party thereto.

Firstly, decision-making.

As stipulated in paragraph 1, article 20, in decision-making the Commission shall seek to promote the interests of all members and reflect the positions of countries. In order to attain this goal, a country should have the right to object to an unacceptable measure for it, even though the measure has been adopted based on the principle of the rule of majority.

This system faithfully meets the principle of consensus in decision-making. It will safeguard minority interests, and thereby, facilitate the smooth operation of the Convention. I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that an objection clause is indispensable in acquiring ratification from the Korean National Assembly. In this regard, I would like to ask the floor to seriously consider the Korean proposal on decision-making.

The second point is the relation between the allocation of total allowable catch and the assessment of national contribution.

In the current draft, one of the quota allocation criteria is the historic catch. We have a double standard applied to us which is very unfair. According to article 10, the catches by fishing nations in the EEZs of coastal States belong to the catches of coastal States when it comes to the allocation of total allowable catch, since it says “historic catch in an area.” However, when it comes to the assessment of national contribution, catches by fishing States in the EEZs of coastal States belong to the total catch of the fishing states.

Thirdly, the direct citation of UNIA provisions to the MHLC Convention.

The UNIA has not yet entered into force and many of the participating countries in the MHLC have not ratified the Agreement. With regard to this situation, Korea has repeatedly asserted that it is unreasonable to incorporate UNIA provisions into the MHLC Convention, and the Korean Government will face difficulty in having the Convention ratified in the National Assembly. Directly cited provisions of UNIA should be inserted into the Convention text or be attached as Annexes. This also makes the Convention an independent and complete package.

Finally, I would like to comment on the adoption of the Convention.

The Chairman has indicated that the conference will adopt the Convention with a 2/3 majority vote, following UN practice. Korea is of the position that this should be seriously reconsidered in order to ensure the optimum utilization and management of fishery resources and effective and smooth operation of the Convention, which is the common goal of the participating countries. The Convention should be adopted by consensus, reflecting the conflicting interests of the countries. I have some more points to make and these will be distributed to the chair and the participants after this.

Korea, as a responsible fishing country, has faithfully implemented all conservation and management measures required by international Convention and regional fishery organizations. When we think that it took about 20 years in adopting and effectuating UNCLOS or the ICCAT Convention, we should not underestimate the results of the six conferences of MHLC. Therefore, in order to draft out a more effective Convention, participating countries must take more time for the extensive discussion and reasonable compromise through which the participating countries have enough opportunity to express their opinions.

-----

Nauru

On behalf of the Nauru delegation, may I extend Nauru’s appreciation to the Government of the State of Hawaii and the Government of the United States of America for hosting this seventh and final session of the Multilateral High Level Conference. It is indeed a pleasure to be back on this beautiful island of Hawaii.

Mr. Chairman, without much further ado, I wish to put forward Nauru’s position on some of the remaining outstanding issues as highlighted in the Chair’s Information Note for this session of MHLC.

Decision-making

Mr. Chairman, Nauru wishes to retain and support the current draft text on decision making. Nauru will not support any proposal for an “ opt out” provision as Nauru believes that such a provision would only cause to undermine the effectiveness of the Commission in implementing its functions with respect to the management and conservation of the fish stocks in the central and western Pacific. If changes are to be made to the current draft text, then Nauru would wish to see the two thirds majority voting reverted to.

Fishing entities

Mr. Chairman, Nauru recognises Chinese Taipei as a major fishing entity in the region and the inclusion of Chinese Taipei as a party to the Convention would greatly enhance and promote the functions and activities of the Commission. Mr. Chairman, Nauru wishes to see the inclusion of Chinese Taipei in the Commission, if not as a Contracting Party, then most definitely as a party with equal rights and obligations as those of a Contracting Party.

Mr. Chairman, Nauru wishes to express its support for Chinese Taipei to be included in the Commission as a fishing entity with equal rights and obligations as accorded to the Contracting Parties. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, may I express on behalf of the Nauru delegation, our dedication and commitment in these final stages of the Multilateral High Level Conference process, in working closely with you and our colleagues around the table, to achieve a convention which will ensure the effective management and conservation of our fish stocks in the central and western Pacific. Thank you.

-----

New Caledonia

On behalf of the New Caledonian delegation, allow me to again address our sincere thanks to the Government of the United States and to the State of Hawaii for the warm welcome extended to us at this new MHLC meeting in Honolulu. I wish to thank you too, Mr. Chairman, and acknowledge with gratitude the constant efforts you and your Secretariat have been putting into the setting up of the future fisheries organization.

On behalf of the Government of New Caledonia, I should like to say again how very pleased we were with the positions adopted by this honorable body at the end of our meeting in April in this very same room. At this previous meeting, Mr. Chairman, you expressed the wish that further discussions take place between France and the United States of America with regard to New Caledonia’s participation as a contracting party in the final agreement, as set out in the draft of the last MHLC report.

A meeting between the United States and France on this subject was indeed held in Paris on 6 July 2000. An exchange of views took place and it was agreed that the exchange would be continued through diplomatic channels and that a further meeting might be necessary to work out an arrangement acceptable to both parties.

However, despite our best endeavours, the situation has remained unchanged since July, even though, point by point, precise and, to our mind, indisputable clarifications were provided on every issue.

As we today enter the final phase of a process that we have been striving with all our might to bring to a successful conclusion, my delegation would like to reaffirm to all participants New Caledonia’s determination to be fully present in the future fisheries organization.

With its new institutional arrangements, New Caledonia is now in possession of an innovative tool that is entirely unprecedented from the legal, the political and, what is even more important, the human point of view; one which, as you are well aware, Mr. Chairman, is in total harmony with the spirit of the custom that we Melanesians practice.

The Noumea Accord proposed a consensus solution that has fully integrated New Caledonia’s specific identity within the French Republic, thus justifying the institutional and legal innovations provided for in its various component documents.

These innovations give New Caledonia, alongside France, a real capability and role in international relations within the Pacific region.

The forum member countries, by granting New Caledonia, on 6 October 1999, observer status in the Pacific Forum, opened the way for strengthened partnership relations with its members, in the cultural, commercial and economic spheres.

At the last session of the United Nations Committee of 24 held on 10 and 11 July 2000 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, the New Caledonian Government once again observed the interest aroused on the international scene by the unique process of emancipation being implemented in our island country, within the framework of the laws of the French Republic.

New Caledonia now has real power to act on the international level in all areas for which responsibility has been transferred to it under the Noumea Accord, in particular management of its Exclusive Economic Zone and environmental protection.

And, as regards the risk of multiplication of votes if New Caledonia were to participate with voting rights, we have demonstrated this risk to be non-existent so long as total transparency in the items included on the agenda of the meetings of the future Commission, which are notified to all participants before each meeting, enables a single vote to be cast by the party really responsible.

Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, New Caledonia will spare no effort to contribute with you to the construction of this great body of common interest, which is essential for our economic development and for the protection of our environment, and which will, above all, ensure a legacy of marine resources for our future generations.

----- Palau

Palau would like to express its full support for the earlier statements of the FFC Chairman and the Chairman of the PNA Group. We would also like to raise an additional point not raised in those statements, the participation of Chinese Taipei.

In addressing this issue, we try to focus primarily on the conservation and management objectives of the Convention rather than its political and diplomatic surroundings. Any convention on the conservation of fish stocks cannot ignore that Taiwanese fishing operations are one of the very largest in our region. A convention which fails to include the full participation of Chinese Taipei would have its effectiveness undermined.

As a result, the delegations present here would like Chinese Taipei to be fully bound by the restrictions and obligations of the Convention. As a matter of fundamental fairness, if we would ask that Chinese Taipei be bound to the same extent as others, we should also provide Chinese Taipei with the same rights and privileges extended to others.

Palau’s first preference is that Chinese Taipei be afforded the status of a Contracting Party. We believe that to be both the simplest and most fair approach. Nonetheless, Palau would be willing to consider alternative proposals which would otherwise provide for the full and equal participation of Chinese Taipei, the key objective being full and equal participation.

-----

Papua New Guinea

Allow me to express on behalf of my delegation our sincere gratitude to our wonderful hosts of the seventh session of the MHLC Conference for the hospitality extended to us since our arrival.

I would also like to extend our appreciation to you, Mr. Chairman, and your team for the untiring effort in guiding this conference this far. I have every confidence that under your continued leadership, we will reach the final goal that we have set ourselves to achieve at the end of MHLC6.

Mr. Chairman, It was at the Madang South Pacific Forum in 1995, that the Forum Leaders issued a firm mandate for the Forum Officials to initiate formal dialogue with DWFNs for the purpose of establishing a sustainable conservation and management measures for the highly migratory fish stocks in the Region, specifically the Central and Western Pacific. In accordance with UNCLOS and UNIA, the Majuro Declaration saw the mutual commitment and obligation by both DWFNs and Pacific Island Nations to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the region.

Mr. Chairman, we have come a long way since Majuro. The advanced stage at which we are today in the MHLC process is a clear reflection of our mutual commitment to the target and timeframe we set ourselves.

PNG continues to attach great importance to the sustainable management of our resources, both for our on-going development aspirations and for the generations to come. Noting the migratory nature of these resources we accept that we cannot do this in isolation.

To this end, Papua New Guinea sees the MHLC process as providing an excellent avenue for cooperation with those with mutual interest in the resources. The significance of such a management arrangement in terms of its’ contribution to sustainability of our fish stocks and development within the island countries of the Region including my own country cannot be underestimated. Moreover, a convention for the conservation and management of the desired fish stocks which provides as a major source of revenue and subsistence for our people will ensure a sustainable future for both the Pacific Island States and the Distant Water Fishing Nations.

The time is right for all of us to make a positive contribution as responsible stewards by ensuring that the draft Convention which are about to conclude provides an effective fisheries conservation and management regime.

Mr. Chairman, as I have noted earlier, the negotiation process has come a long way. Like other delegations, Papua New Guinea has given way on many issues that were otherwise non-negotiable in our view. The most notable include, recognition of special interest in pockets of high seas adjacent to our waters, exclusion of archipelagic waters, area of application, criteria for financial contributions and provisions relating to decision making.

However, in the spirit of cooperation and in good faith, giving due cognisance to the paramount objective of conservation and management, Papua New Guinea accepted the outcome of MHLC6.

On this basis, not withstanding outstanding issues, my delegation believes that the Chairman’s draft text before us is a satisfactory culmination of the concessions that we have all given and taken as is normal in many negotiations.

In addition, Papua New Guinea wishes to express support for the statements made by the respective Chairmen of the Forum Fisheries Committee and the Parties to the Nauru Agreement.

PNG came to this meeting with specific mandate. That was to focus deliberations on outstanding issues that were circulated to Capitals by the Chairman prior to this session, with the intention of concluding negotiations and adopting the Convention for signatures next week. My delegation does not have any mandate to enter into any negotiations on those issues that were discussed at length and the outcome of which were mutually reached during the course of the past six MHLC negotiating rounds.

During the course of the days ahead therefore, Papua New Guinea looks forward to working closely with colleagues in finalising those outstanding issues as identified by the Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, turning to the procedures for adopting the draft Convention text, Papua New Guinea delegation has no difficulties with your suggestions given the appropriateness of the rules of procedure being proposed.

With regards to your proposal to formalise Mr. Michael Lodge’s designation as Executive Secretary for this Conference, my delegation wholeheartedly welcomes the proposal in view of Mr. Lodge’s valuable contribution to the MHLC process to date.

-----

Chinese Taipei

On behalf of my delegation, I would like to join other delegations to express our gratitude to the United States Government for hosting this final round of MHLC negotiation and to praise the efforts of our Chairman Ambassador Nandan in pursuing a multilaterally agreed Convention.

We have come along a long way since the Majuro round of MHLC meeting in 1997. As we indicated in our opening statement delivered in the Majuro meeting, our tuna fishing fleets have operated in the waters of the western and central Pacific Ocean for three decades. The developments between coastal States and us throughout the years proves that cooperation in fisheries brings mutual growth and prosperity.

Currently, there are around four hundred large and small Taiwanese fishing vessels operating in this waters with an annual production of more than three hundred thousand metric tons. With rich regional and global fisheries operating and management experiences, we see ourselves as a constructive force in the formulation of any possible regional arrangement which satisfies the mutual interests of both coastal and fishing nations. While approaching the conclusion of this Conference and the adoption of a Convention, we are still faced with some outstanding issues. Embracing with the same spirit and belief that we have held since 1997, we sincerely hope that all the substantive issues related to fisheries conservation and management will be solved on a reasonable basis while the participation issue of Chinese Taipei be solved on an equal basis with a status of contracting party.

Mr. Chairman, we have taken part in this Conference with cooperative spirit and constructive initiatives. We wish that we will reach a mutually and collectively beneficial agreement at the end of this Conference.

-----

Tuvalu

My delegation would also like to join those who spoke before us, in thanking our host the Government of the United States of America and the State of Hawaii, for their readiness and willingness to have us back for the fourth consecutive session here in Honolulu, after recent events in Fiji prevented this final session being held there.

I refer to this session as the final session of this Multilateral High Level Conference on a Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, because my delegation has come to this session prepared to conclude this negotiation process that commenced way back in December 1994 and ready to adopt the Convention that we have negotiated since then. I understand there are few major outstanding issues that we still need to attend to at this session. These issues are conveniently set out in the information paper you circulated in June 2000 and they include decision making, the position of fishing entities and the participation by territories. There are, of course, other issues which, in my delegation view, need some tidying up without any substantive negotiation required.

Although, this session officially commenced today, it has in fact already started on Monday 28 August 2000 when you convened those useful informal consultations. My delegation participated in those informal consultations and would like to commend you for the initiative to convene those informal consultations. Those consultations had enabled delegations like mine to have a fair sense and appreciation of the positions of other delegations in respect of the remaining outstanding issues and their general attitude to the MHLC process so far. Although, my delegation was disappointed to hear some negative attitude of some delegations to the work achieved so far and their intent to undo the achievement that we have all achieved through lengthy negotiations over the years and where painful compromises were made by all delegations, my delegation was still able to sense a great sense of good will and willingness to cooperate amongst the majority of delegations which should be sufficient to ensure that we are able to finish off the hard work that we worked so hard for almost six year now during this session.

Mr. Chairman, we all started in this process in a spirit of cooperation and partnership because we individually and collectively know as a matter fact that it is all in our individual and collective interest to conserve and manage these highly migratory fish stocks in this region. Now that we are almost at the end of the process, some are starting to doubt this spirit of partnership because of their individual interest and demands. Of course, we cannot be ignorant of our own national interests, but the primary objective that motivated this whole process was our common concern for the health and sustainable utilization of those fish stock in our region and only through our collective efforts could we ensure they are harvested at a sustainable rate. So if we were genuine in our participation in this process then we must have as our paramount interest that of the sustainability of these fish stocks.

In terms of those outstanding issues, my delegation would like to associate itself with the statement made by Australia on behalf of the FFA member countries. On the specific critical issue of decision-making, my delegation will continue to oppose any attempt to further dilute or weaken the current text especially by introducing any opt out provision. We simply maintain the view that we have compromised so far that any further weakening of the current text will render the whole management regime ineffective, which may provoke the question of whether it is really worth having a convention in the first place. In light of the experience of other similar regimes around the world, we simply do not want to go down that path where the regime is rendered ineffective because of its inability to make decisions. I submit, Mr. Chairman, under the current text decisions are already hard to make with the very high threshold required, we do not want to make it impossible for decisions to be made.

On the other issue of fishing entities, or in particular the participation of Chinese Taipei, it has always been my delegation’s preference that Chinese Taipei is conferred full contracting party status. However, my delegation is fully cognisant of the sensitivity of the issue and the difficulty encountered by other delegations with such a proposition. The fact remain though, that with the extensive fishing presence of Chinese Taipei in the region they must participate fully in the work of the commission and my delegation would like to see some satisfactory formulation that would ensure their full participation without invoking any of the sensitive aspects of the issue.

On the other issues my delegation would reserve its comments until those issues are specifically addressed whether here in plenary or in informal sessions. My delegation pledges its full cooperation and continued support to you, Mr. Chairman, and the conference in our endeavours to conclude these negotiations and adopt a convention by the end of this week.

-----

Vanuatu

On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu, I would like express our sincere gratitude to the Government of the United States of America, the State of Hawaii, and the Western Pacific Fisheries for agreeing at short notice to host the final session of the MHLC process in Honolulu.

The Government of the Republic of Vanuatu would also like to express its gratitude to you, Mr. Chairman for your dedication, efforts and leadership in steering the MHLC negotiations to the final stages of achieving a successful conclusion.

Mr. Chairman, as Coastal State as well as a fishing nation, Vanuatu is committed to the principles and obligations embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the associated Implementing Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks that calls for cooperative efforts by both the Coastal States and other States participating in the harvesting of the highly migratory fish species to establish regional arrangements to conserve and manage these fisheries.

The conclusion and adoption of UNCLOS is a result of the international concern shared by many nations that uncontrolled fishing of the tuna resources resulting in overexploitation of the stocks and overcapitalization of fishing fleets. One of the most innovative aspects of the LOS Convention was the creation of the 200 nautical mile exclusive zone (EEZ). The LOS Convention represented a radical departure from the traditional regime of fisheries management. The EEZ regime resulted in responsibility for living resources to coastal States. The shift in management paradigm was one from freedom of fishing to management by coastal States through the principle of sovereign rights. The LOS Convention grants coastal States sovereign rights to conserve, manage, explore and exploit the living resources in their EEZ. A corollary of this is the right to enforcement in the EEZ.

Mr. Chairman, sovereign rights are not absolute and are subject to conservation qualification. Article 64 of the LOS Convention imposes a duty on coastal States to cooperate with Distant Water Fishing Nations in the Conservation of highly migratory fish stocks. The commitment for cooperation between the coastal States and DWFNs was established in 1997 at the second MHLC in Majuro, Republic of Marshall Islands, under the Majuro Declaration in which the FFA member countries and the DWFNs declared their commitment to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in accordance with the LOS Convention and the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement. A time frame of three years from June 1997 was set within which to develop a comprehensive arrangement.

Mr. Chairman, time has finally caught up with us. It is now three years, two months and 17 days since the adoption of the Majuro Declaration. The haunting question is “Would this be the final MHLC negotiation process?” For the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu, this is the final conference of the MHLC process. We have come along way in negotiating this convention. We are now at the end of that long and winding road of negotiations. A lot of time and money has been spent on negotiating this Convention. Vanuatu is ready to sign this convention.

However, it appears that some of us in this room are not ready to conclude the negotiations and are using every drop of fuel into their machines to stall the process. The common interest we all share is the long-term sustainable utilization of the highly migratory fish stocks in the western, central, southern, eastern and northern Pacific. Yet it would seem that some of us have some other hidden interests, apart from the common interest. Having said that, Mr. Chairman, we should put aside our personal interests and strive to achieve the common interest, which in the long run would promote economical growth and sustainable management and conservation of the highly migratory fish stocks.

The current draft Convention is the result of major concession on the part of FFA member countries to take into account the concerns and interests of DWFNs, with an aim to reach an effective convention. In the same negotiation spirit it only fair to ask that we sacrifice some of our national interests to achieve the common goal.

Mr. Chairman, it is anticipated that a final draft Convention will be agreed upon by the end of this week, ready for adoption and signing by our Ministers or their representatives next week. It is only to fair to ask that the final draft Convention should allow for all parties, whether it be States or fishing entities fully participate equally in its implementation process.

Mr. Chairman, Vanuatu is of the opinion, that we can achieve our task of concluding the negotiations of this convention, and can focus on its implementation process. We will continue to provide our support to ensure that this is achieved.

-----

Wallis and Futuna

Mr. Chairman, the delegation of Wallis and Futuna would like to join other delegations in expressing deep appreciation to the Government of the United States and the State of Hawaii for hosting the last four consecutive sessions of MHLC.

Mr. Chairman, we also thank you and your secretariat for the hard work and the progress achieved so far.

As a central Pacific small developing territory, Wallis and Futuna has continuously attended the MHLC meetings because of its fundamental objective which is to ensure the long-term sustainability of the resources in its waters.

Being a full member of two regional organizations (SPC and SPREP) our territory expected to participate in the same way in this Convention. However, Mr. Chairman, we are ready to accept our position in the Article 44 of the current draft.

In the meantime we would like to acknowledge the evolution of the respective statutes of French Polynesia and New Caledonia and support their right to vote in this Convention.

Having said all this, Mr. Chairman, we wish the meeting success in its final deliberations.

-----

Ecuador

First of all, on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Ecuador as its Under-Secretary of Fisheries, I would like to thank Chairman Ambassador Satya N. Nandan and delegates of all participating countries for inviting us to participate as an Observer in this Multilateral High Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific. We would also like to thank the United States of America and the State of Hawaii Government for their hospitality. It is a great pleasure for us to be here in Honolulu attending this important meeting and being witness of its most crucial moments.

As you know, Ecuador is an important member of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), organization that regulates migratory fisheries in the eastern Pacific for the last 50 years. In a small and poor country as Ecuador, tuna fisheries has become one of the most important activities: tuna is ranked third into private Ecuadorian exports and because of the large installed cannery processing capacity, is one of the most important labor provider in the Country and direct responsible for the aggressive developing of Manta, the most important fishing port in Ecuador.

Ecuador fleet is the second largest in the Eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO) and absolute leader of tuna catches in the last two years. Ecuadorian fishers have been catching tuna in the EPO during the last 50 years. Larger Ecuadorian vessels fish even beyond 150° meridian IATTC regulating zone. Ecuadorian fishers have learned that the only way to preserve these resources for future generations is considering, accepting and respecting all conservation measurements implemented by regional fishing organizations, in our case by IATTC, adopted in accordance to scientific staff’s recommendations.

Ecuador highly appreciates this enormous effort made by western and central Pacific countries to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in this area at a time in which everybody is worried about over-fishing, over-capacity and other sensitive subjects that make this an everyday smaller fishing world. This is why Ecuador, deeply concerned about these issues, is attending this meeting. Ecuador is here to find out conservation, managing strategies and responsibilities you are assuming to set up the best basis to guarantee fishing sustainability.

We are also concerned about inter-regional and inter-institutional relations, which we consider to be basic to get harmonic objectives into the biggest and richest ocean God has given us to take care of: The Pacific Ocean.

Ecuador proposes the establishment of the best possible conditions to promote close cooperation between our investigators, our industry representatives, our Governments and our conservation and managing organizations. World's actual circumstances demand it so.

We want to take this opportunity to invite you to open this Organization to allow eastern Pacific fishing coastal countries to participate, as we all know, the species we worry about do not know about borders.

We wish the best success in the foundation of this new organization and hope that in the next days you will find the way to get antagonist positions closer, so the signing of the Convention will materialize.

Once again we invite you to work closely with your eastern neighbors, because the Pacific Ocean is only one.

-----

Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC)

On behalf of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), I would like to express our great pleasure in being in Honolulu for this important Conference.

As we have stated on previous occasions, we consider it particularly important that this negotiation be successful, since the effective conservation and management of many highly migratory species of the Pacific Ocean, such as bigeye, northern bluefin tuna, and northern albacore tuna will require close cooperation between the IATTC and any arrangement arising from these talks. Also, this negotiation is of particular interest for the IATTC member governments since they are in the process of renegotiating the IATTC Convention, and the work done here is relevant to that process. The IATTC has always enjoyed good scientific cooperation throughout the Pacific, and it is evident that the IATTC and the future Commission for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean will have to cooperate closely to properly conserve and manage those species of mutual interest. It is clear that it will be necessary to establish, in a systematic, meaningful manner, effective operational arrangements between the IATTC and the new Commission to harmonize conservation and management arrangements for stocks that require Pacific-wide measures.

There are two issues that require close cooperation and consultation between the two Pacific management bodies. One is the matter of overlapping areas of application, resulting from language in the Conventions or in resolutions, that stipulate the geographical area in which the conservation and management measures are to apply. The draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Central and Western Pacific defines the eastern boundary of its area of application to include an area east of 150°W longitude. This would create an area of overlap with the areas of application of IATTC conservation and management measures, the area of the Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and the area described in the draft negotiating text for a new IATTC Convention. Vessels based in the Americas regularly fish in that overlap area, and in recent years have caught considerable amounts of tuna there. It is therefore important that any measures taken by the proposed new Commission for the Central and Western Pacific take into account the historical presence of these vessels and the international management regime under which they fish, to try to a avoid a situation in which fishermen might be subject to two different management regimes when fishing in one area. It would appear that this problem has been addressed by the language in the current negotiating text, but governments will need to ensure that it is considered in the future implementation of conservation and management measures.

The second aspect of cooperation between the two organizations relates to the fact that several species migrate throughout the Pacific, and it is thus difficult or impossible for either organization alone to conserve and manage them effectively. Close cooperation, at both scientific and policy levels, will be necessary to ensure that several important highly migratory species are not overfished. It does not appear that this matter is specifically addressed in the draft negotiating text.

As I have noted, the IATTC member States are in the process of renegotiating the IATTC Convention, and both of the issues in which cooperation is necessary – overlapping areas and cross-boundary migrations – have been discussed by the participants in the negotiation. The One idea which has been mentioned during the course of these talks – (I am certain that it will be given serious consideration during the next negotiating session)to help ensure good cooperation in the future is to establish – of expressing in the new IATTC Convention the idea of establishing a permanent consultative committee to ensure that a systematic, meaningful dialogue takes place between the two organizations. If, as I hope, this idea is of interest to the nations involved in this negotiation, we would be pleased to discuss how to advance cooperation between the two organizations in more detail during the course of this Conference, and expect that the IATTC member governments would be interested in seriously considering any ideas for defining a consultative mechanism that may emerge from this Conference.

We believe that the question of cooperation between the two Pacific management bodies should be addressed during the Preparatory Conference, which the participants to the sixth session of the Conference agreed to establish. We understand that the Preparatory Conference would be responsible for several matters important to ensuring that the future Commission is ready to operate effectively upon entry into force of the Convention, and we hope that the cooperation mechanism between the two organizations is one of the subjects the Preparatory Conference would consider so that meaningful cooperative efforts could begin right away.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I should note that the IATTC members had the opportunity to consult with representatives from Canada and the United States on the issue of the possible extension of the eastern boundary elaborated in the MHLC text to cover all or part of the migratory range of northern albacore tuna, which range throughout all northern hemisphere waters south of 50°N latitude. On 15 June I wrote to you expressing the views of the IATTC on this subject, which I would like to summarize briefly now. First, the IATTC believes that areas of overlap between the two Commissions should be avoided if at all possible, so as to preclude potential conflicting measures applying to the same fishermen operating in the same areas. The IATTC recognizes that there is already one potential area of overlap further south, but would be concerned should another such area be created, particularly one that extended so far east as to reach the coast of the Americas. In negotiating the new IATTC Convention, the member States have tried to avoid creating potential overlap areas by limiting the Convention Area to the waters east of 150°W longitude, although it is clear that several important highly migratory species in the Pacific do travel substantial distances on both sides of that meridian.

Second, the IATTC members are interested in doing everything possible to enhance cooperation between the IATTC and any new commission that may emerge for western Pacific tuna. They believe it would be absolutely essential that the two commissions do all they can to support meaningful consultation and collaboration to ensure that conservation and management measures are compatible and complimentary. This is the case not only for albacore, but for other highly migratory species as well. In this regard, the members will, as noted earlier, be giving serious consideration to strengthening their draft negotiating text.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We look forward to the discussion during the meeting and to a productive outcome.

----- ANNEX 4

INFORMATION NOTE ON MATTERS BEFORE THE SEVENTH SESSION OF THE MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC

1. This information note is submitted as an informal background document for the seventh and final session of the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, which will take place at Honolulu from 30 August to 5 September 2000. In addition, the Chairman will hold informal consultations on outstanding issues with interested delegations from 27 to 29 August at the Conference venue.

2. The sixth session of the Conference was held from 11 to 19 April 2000. The work of the Conference was, as has been the practice in previous sessions, guided by a list of key issues prepared by the Chairman. The Conference gave more detailed consideration to certain issues which had been raised during previous sessions as well as proposals on specific issues made by individual delegations. The Conference also gave consideration for the first time to a draft resolution establishing a preparatory conference pending entry into force of the Convention.

I. ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE SIXTH SESSION

3. Substantial progress was made on a number of key issues. At the end of the s ession, it was possible to issue a revised draft text of the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Draft Convention/Rev.1, dated 19 April 2000), (hereinafter “the draft Convention”), which reflects the progress that was made. Some of the specific issues on which progress was made are outlined below. A. Area of application 4. At the fourth session, the Conference had reached agreement in principle on the geographic area of competence of the proposed Commission, subject to further consideration of the northern and western boundaries. However, despite lengthy discussion during the fifth session, it was impossible to reach a consensus on a clearly defined western boundary. While several delegations spoke in favour of a northern boundary at 50° N., it appeared that such a boundary would cause difficulties for other delegations and accordingly the revised draft Convention text issued at the end of the fifth session defined the western and northern boundaries of the Convention Area by reference to the migratory range of the stocks. During the sixth session, the Conference again discussed the matter of the Convention Area but, at the end of the discussions, no further changes were proposed to the definition of the Convention Area. It is important to clarify, however, that the Convention applies to the waters of the Pacific Ocean. In particular, the western side the Convention Area is not intended to include waters of South-East Asia which are not part of the Pacific Ocean; nor is it intended to include the waters of the South China Sea as this would involve States which are not participants in the Conference. With respect to the eastern boundary, a proposal was made by Canada during the sixth session to extend the competence of the Commission over albacore tuna. This matter was to be the subject of consultations intersessionally between Canada, the United States and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC).

5. On 16 June 2000, the Chairman was informed by the Director of IATTC that Canada, the United States and IATTC member countries had engaged in a detailed consultation on the Canadian proposal during the fourth meeting of the IATTC Working Group to review the IATTC Convention, held at La Jolla in May 2000. The matter was discussed further during the annual meeting of IATTC in June 2000 at San Jose, Costa Rica. The outcome of these discussions is set out in a letter from the Director of the IATTC to the Chairman. A copy of the letter is annexed to this note. B. Scientific advice 6. The Conference reviewed once again articles 12 and 13 of the draft Convention relating to the provision of scientific advice and made certain adjustments to the text in order to reflect more accurately the respective functions of the Commission, the Scientific Committee and the scientific experts. The text of these articles was improved and streamlined and, with those revisions, this difficult matter was satisfactorily resolved. C. Observer programme 7. Several constructive proposals were made to improve the text of article 28 relating to the regional observer programme. The Conference established an informal group to work on this matter under the chairmanship of Mr. Feleti Teo (Tuvalu). The group was able to reach agreement on the key issues involved and the outcome of its work was incorporated into the draft Convention. D. Transhipment 8. Several delegations at the sixth session raised issues relating to transhipment as reflected in article 29 of the Convention. Following discussions in informal meetings, it was possible to revise the text to the satisfaction of most delegations. The most difficult issue was the question of the prohibition of transhipment at sea by purse- seiners in paragraph 4 of article 29, where some delegations felt that it should be possible to provide exemptions for certain types of vessels. As a result of the discussions, the text was revised so as to allow for “any specific exemptions which the Commission may allow”. E. Boarding and inspection 9. The issue of boarding and inspection was revisited in light of concerns raised by a number of delegations. Improvements were made to paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 26 in order to clarify the nature and application of the procedures that the Commission will need to adopt in due course. While some delegations remained concerned about the application of articles 21 and 22 of the 1995 Agreement, it was felt that the better approach would be to allow the Commission to adopt such additional procedures of a practical nature as it may decide are necessary for the implementation of those articles. F. Compliance and enforcement (including vessel monitoring system) 10. The Conference was able to improve the text of articles 23, 2 4 and 25 of the Convention. A number of technical adjustments were made to the text in order to further clarify the provisions and remove certain inconsistencies. The most difficult issue was the matter of the high seas vessel monitoring system under article 24, paragraph 8, where a number of delegations had specific concerns. As a result of the discussions, further adjustments were made in order to take into account the situation of certain traditional fishing vessels from developing States and to require the Commission to adopt appropriate measures to protect the confidentiality of information received from the vessel monitoring system.

11. The more difficult aspect of this problem, however, was that of the procedures for transmission of information from the vessel monitoring system to the flag State and to the Commission. Following much discussion, an attempt was made by the Chairman to provide a compromise, which apparently was not acceptable as a basis to move forward. After further consideration of the issue, towards the end of the session, a revision was requested to provide that transmission should be simultaneous, and this is reflected in the draft Convention. G. Financial arrangements 12. At the beginning of the sixth session, the Conference e stablished an informal group under the chairmanship of Mr. Grant Bryden (New Zealand) to consider issues relating to financial and budgetary matters. The group carried out its work on the basis of an information paper prepared by the representative of FAO, Dr David Doulman. The informal group was able to make a great deal of progress and reached a good understanding of the way in which the budget of the Commission might be funded in the future. As a result, certain revisions were made to article 18 of the draft Convention to reflect the outcome of the discussions in the informal group as reported to the Conference. G. Entry into force 13. Different views were expressed in the fifth session as to how the Convention should be brought into force. The particular concern was that the entry into force of the Convention should not be stalled for an inordinate length of time. Initially, a simplified provision was proposed whereby the Convention could be brought into force after two years. However, this created problems for those who felt that they may not be in a position to ratify the Convention at an early stage. Furthermore, it was generally accepted that it would be undesirable if the Convention entered into force with only a few participants. The Conference revisited this matter during the early part of the sixth session and after much discussion it was possible to reach a compromise solution whereby the Convention would require ratification by a representative group of States in order to enter into force. However, it was also felt that entry into force should not be inordinately delayed and provision has therefore been made for the Convention to enter into force upon ratification by a majority of participants should there be a lengthy delay. The outcome of the discussions on this matter are reflected in article 36 of the draft Convention. II. OUTSTANDING ISSUES 14. Based upon the discussions during the sixth session, the following areas would appear to require further consideration prior to adoption of the draft Convention. A. Decision-making 15. The issue of decision-making had been identified as one of the most difficult issues to be addressed during the fifth session. Considerable progress was made on this issue during the fifth and sixth sessions and the Conference reached a common understanding on the need to have recourse to a prompt and effective procedure for decision-making, which would avoid the possibility of deadlock on important conservation and management issues. The procedure that has been developed in article 20 of the draft Convention identifies a number of key issues upon which consensus is required, with a four-fifths majority voting procedure for other issues. Decisions upon which consensus is required include the adoption of rules of procedure (article 9), decisions on allocation of total allowable catch or levels of fishing effort (article 10), adoption of financial regulations (article 17), adoption of the budget and the formula for assessment of contributions to the budget (article 18), admission of new members (article 34), and adoption of amendments to the Convention (article 39). In the event that a member of the Commission objects to a decision, the draft provides a system for independent review of that decision, with the possibility for the Commission to modify, amend or revoke its decision in the light of the findings and recommendations of the review panel. In addition, in the event of deadlock within the Commission on an issue requiring consensus, there is a procedure for conciliation in order to achieve consensus within a reasonable time.

16. Decision-making is always a very delicate and difficult issue which requires adequate protection for all members as well as a system which ensures that decisions can be taken in an efficient and responsible manner. There are various approaches to the decision-making process. It may be recalled that the normal rule for adoption of substantive matters in most fora is by a two-thirds majority. However, in this case, the bar has been raised to require a four-fifths majority for decisions on substantive matters in addition to those which are subject to consensus. This is a very high threshold which can only be achieved if there is broad agreement. Nevertheless, at the end of the sixth session some delegations asked for more time to consider the issue of decision-making and it will therefore be necessary to return to this critical issue. B. Position of fishing entities 17. The question of the relationship of fishing entities to the dra ft Convention has always been a particularly difficult issue. Unfortunately, it was not possible to make progress on this issue during the sixth session. The issue is a sensitive political matter for the two parties concerned, but it is equally important for all other participants in the Conference because they want to ensure that in any conservation and management regime all major actors are involved and comply with the regime that is being established. Most participants in the Conference would like to see an outcome which creates legal obligations on fishing entities and enables substantive participation. The difficulty is how to find a formula which creates a legally binding relationship without prejudging the legal and political status of such entities. At the end of the sixth session the Chairman had requested all concerned to give further thought to this matter and to show some flexibility. C. Participation by territories 18. On the question of participation, certain other technical issues remain to be resolved concerning the possible participation of the French territories in the region. Those concerned with the issue have indicated that they will continue to consult intersessionally with a view to finding a satisfactory solution prior to the beginning of the next session. III. PREPARATORY CONFERENCE 19. As anticipated at previous sessions of the Conference, the sixth session was able to devote some time to detailed consideration of the arrangements to prepare for entry into force of the Convention. The Conference considered this issue on the basis of a draft resolution prepared by the Chairman. Following the discussion, that draft was revised and further considered and by the end of the session there appeared to be a broad level of agreement on the text of the resolution (MHLC/WP.3/Rev.2.). The draft resolution provides for the establishment of a Preparatory Conference which would be responsible for the preparation of most of the practical and administrative arrangements for the future Commission, such as the institutional arrangements for the establishment of the Commission, its rules of procedure, meetings, initial budget, location of the headquarters, structure of the Secretariat, relationship with existing bodies etc., so that, upon entry into force of the Convention, the Commission will have before it the necessary recommendations to consider and adopt and can begin its work without delay.

20. The participants in the Preparatory Conference would be the participants in this Conference. The resolution anticipates that the Preparatory Conference would begin its work within a reasonable time after the adoption of the Convention. The Conference also addressed the question of the funding of the work of the Preparatory Conference and it became clear that the administrative costs would rely heavily on voluntary funding. IV. PROGRAMME OF WORK 21. In 1997, the Conference made a commitment to conclude its work by June 2000. The final session of the Conference will take place at Honolulu from 30 August to 5 September 2000. It will take the form of a three-day meeting of officials to finalize the Convention text and the resolution establishing the Preparatory Conference, as well as the Final Act of the Conference and related institutional and administrative issues for the continuation of the process. This will be followed by a two-day ministerial level meeting during which the Convention will be opened for signature.

22. During the first three days the Conference will have to formally adopt the text of the Convention and the Final Act. The Final Act of the Conference is a factual record of the proceedings of the Conference. It does not contain substantive issues but rather indicates when the Conference began, how many times it met and who were the participants, as well as recording various procedural developments. The resolution establishing the Preparatory Conference would be annexed to the Final Act and adopted at the same time. The Final Act would also be signed by participants to authenticate the proceedings.

23. For the purpose of adopting the draft Convention text, it is the Chairman’s intention to work on the basis of standard procedures for multilateral conferences, the most appropriate example of which is to be found in the rules of procedure of the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (A/CONF.164/6). It is proposed that those rules will be applied, mutatis mutandis, to the Conference. The ideal goal, however, would be to have the Convention and related instruments adopted by consensus and, as far as possible, the Conference should conduct its work on the basis of general agreement.

24. It should be noted that, in accordance with the rules of procedure, the credentials of representativ es and the names of alternate representatives and advisers are required to be submitted to the Chairman of the Conference, if possible not later than 24 hours after the opening of the Conference. All delegations should therefore bring appropriate credentials to the meeting, issued in the proper form by the Head of State or Government or Minister of Foreign Affairs. A procedure will be established for the examination of the credentials of representatives and a report made to the Conference. Fishing entities participating in the Conference will provide the Chairman with a letter from an appropriate authority containing a list of the members of the delegation.

V. INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS

25. As there remain outstanding issues of concern to some delegations, the Chairman intends to hold informal consultations, at the Conference venue, from 27 to 29 August. These informal consultations will focus on the outstanding issues identified above and will be open to participation by all interested delegations. Other specific issues of concern to delegations may also be raised.

16 July 2000 – – – ANNEX 5

CREDENTIALS OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE SEVENTH SESSION OF THE MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN

Report by the Chairman

1. As of 4 September 2000, formal credentials issued by the Head of State or Government, by the Minister for Foreign Affairs or by person authorized by him or her have been submitted for the representatives of the following 22 States participating in the seventh session of the Multilateral High-level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean: Australia, Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Japan, Korea, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and United States of America.

2. As of 4 September 2000, information concerning the appointment of representatives participating in the seventh session of the Multilateral High-level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean has been communicated by means of facsimile or in the form of initialled notes verbale from Ministries, Embassies and other Government offices or authorities, by the following 2 States participating in the Conference: Indonesia and Kiribati.

3. The credentials of the representative of New Caledonia has also been received from the President of the Government of New Caledonia.

4. A formal notification has also been received informing the Chairman of the names of the representatives of Chinese Taipei.

– – – ANNEX 6

CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN

The Contracting Parties to this Convention, Determined to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable use, in particular for human food consumption, of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean for present and future generations, Recalling the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 and the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, Recognizing that, under the 1982 Convention and the Agreement, coastal States and States fishing in the region shall cooperate with a view to ensuring conservation and promoting the objective of optimum utilization of highly migratory fish stocks throughout their range, Mindful that effective conservation and management measures require the application of the precautionary approach and the best scientific information available, Conscious of the need to avoid adverse impacts on the marine environment, preserve biodiversity, maintain the integrity of marine ecosystems and minimize the risk of long-term or irreversible effects of fishing operations, Recognizing the ecological and geographical vulnerability of the small island developing States, territories and possessions in the region, their economic and social dependence on highly migratory fish stocks, and their need for specific assistance, including financial, scientific and technological assistance, to allow them to participate effectively in the conservation, management and sustainable use of the highly migratory fish stocks, Further recognizing that smaller island developing States have unique needs which require special attention and consideration in the provision of financial, scientific and technological assistance, Acknowledging that compatible, effective and binding conservation and management measures can be achieved only through cooperation between coastal States and States fishing in the region, Convinced that effective conservation and management of the highly migratory fish stocks of the western and central Pacific Ocean in their entirety may best be achieved through the establishment of a regional Commission, Have agreed as follows:

PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Use of terms For the purposes of this Convention: (a) “1982 Convention” means the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982; (b) “Agreement” means the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks; (c) “Commission” means the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean established in accordance with this Convention; (d) “fishing” means: (i) searching for, catching, taking or harvesting fish; (ii) attempting to search for, catch, take or harvest fish; (iii) engaging in any other activity which can reasonably be expected to r esult in the locating, catching, taking or harvesting of fish for any purpose; (iv) placing, searching for or recovering fish aggregating devices or associated electronic equipment such as radio beacons; (v) any operations at sea directly in support of, or in preparation for, any activity described in subparagraphs (i) to (iv), including transhipment; (vi) use of any other vessel, vehicle, aircraft or hovercraft, for any activity described in subparagraphs (i) to (v) except for emergencies involving the health and safety of the crew or the safety of a vessel; (e) “fishing vessel” means any vessel used or intended for use for the purpose of fishing, including support ships, carrier vessels and any other vessel directly involved in such fishing operations; (f) “highly migratory fish stocks” means all fish stocks of the species listed in Annex 1 of the 1982 Convention occurring in the Convention Area, and such other species of fish as the Commission may determine; (g) “regional economic integration organization” means a regional economic integration organization to which its member States have transferred competence over matters covered by this Convention, including the authority to make decisions binding on its member States in respect of those matters; (h) “transhipment” means the unloading of all or any of the fish on board a fishing vessel to another fishing vessel either at sea or in port. Article 2 Objective The objective of this Convention is to ensure, through effective management, the long-term conservation and sustainable use of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean in accordance with the 1982 Convention and the Agreement. Article 3 Area of application 1. Subject to article 4, the area of competence of the Commission (herei nafter referred to as “the Convention Area”) comprises all waters of the Pacific Ocean bounded to the south and to the east by the following line: From the south coast of Australia due south along the 141 ° meridian of east longitude to its intersection with the 55 ° parallel of south latitude; thence due east along the 55 ° parallel of south latitude to its intersection with the 150 ° meridian of east longitude; thence due south along the 150 ° meridian of east longitude to its intersection with the 60 ° parallel of south latitude; thence due east along the 60 ° parallel of south latitude to its intersection with the 130 ° meridian of west longitude; thence due north along the 130 ° meridian of west longitude to its intersection with the 4 ° parallel of south latitude; thence due west along the 4° parallel of south latitude to its intersection with the 150 ° meridian of west longitude; thence due north along the 150 ° meridian of west longitude. 2. Nothing in this Convention shall constitute recognition of the claims or positions of any of the members of the Commission concerning the legal status and extent of waters and zones claimed by any such members. 3. This Convention applies to all stocks of highly migratory fish within the Convention Area except sauries. Conservation and management measures under this Convention shall be applied throughout the range of the stocks, or to specific areas within the Convention Area, as determined by the Commission. Article 4 Relationship between this Convention and the 1982 Convention Nothing in this Convention shall prejudice the rights, jurisdiction and duties of States under the 1982 Convention and the Agreement. This Convention shall be interpreted and applied in the context of and in a manner consistent with the 1982 Convention and the Agreement.

PART II CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS Article 5 Principles and measures for conservation and management In order to conserve and manage highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area in their entirety, the members of the Commission shall, in giving effect to their duty to cooperate in accordance with the 1982 Convention, the Agreement and this Convention: (a) adopt measures to ensure long-term sustainability of highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area and promote the objective of their optimum utilization; (b) ensure that such measures are based on the best scientific evidence available and are designed to maintain or restore stocks at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, as qualified by relevant environmental and economic factors, including the special requirements of developing States in the Convention Area, particularly small island developing States, and taking into account fishing patterns, the interdependence of stocks and any generally recommended international minimum standards, whether subregional, regional or global; (c) apply the precautionary approach in accordance with this Convention and all relevant internationally agreed standards and recommended practices and procedures; (d) assess the impacts of fishing, other human activities and environmental factors on target stocks, non-target species, and species belonging to the same ecosystem or dependent upon or associated with the target stocks; (e) adopt measures to mi nimize waste, discards, catch by lost or abandoned gear, pollution originating from fishing vessels, catch of non-target species, both fish and non-fish species, (hereinafter referred to as non-target species) and impacts on associated or dependent species, in particular endangered species and promote the development and use of selective, environmentally safe and cost-effective fishing gear and techniques; (f) protect biodiversity in the marine environment; (g) take measures to prevent or eliminate over-fis hing and excess fishing capacity and to ensure that levels of fishing effort do not exceed those commensurate with the sustainable use of fishery resources; (h) take into account the interests of artisanal and subsistence fishers; (i) collect and share, in a timely manner, complete and accurate data concerning fishing activities on, inter alia, vessel position, catch of target and non-target species and fishing effort, as well as information from national and international research programmes; and (j) implement and enforce conservation and management measures through effective monitoring, control and surveillance. Article 6 Application of the precautionary approach 1. In applying the precautionary approach, the members of the Commission shall: (a) apply the guidelines set out in Annex II of the Agreement, which shall form an integral part of this Convention, and determine, on the basis of the best scientific information available, stock-specific reference points and the action to be taken if they are exceeded; (b) take into account, inter alia, uncertainties relating to the size and productivity of the stocks, reference points, stock condition in relation to such reference points, levels and distributions of fishing mortality and the impact of fishing activities on non-target and associated or dependent species, as well as existing and predicted oceanic, environmental and socio-economic conditions; and (c) develop data collection and research programmes to assess the impact of fishing on non-target and associated or dependent species and their environment, and adopt plans where necessary to ensure the conservation of such species and to protect habitats of special concern. 2. Members of the Commission shall be more cautious when information is uncertain, unrelia ble or inadequate. The absence of adequate scientific information shall not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and management measures. 3. Members of the Commission shall take measures to ensure that, when reference points are approached, they will not be exceeded. In the event they are exceeded, members of the Commission shall, without delay, take the action determined under paragraph 1(a) to restore the stocks. 4. Where the status of target stocks or non-target or associa ted or dependent species is of concern, members of the Commission shall subject such stocks and species to enhanced monitoring in order to review their status and the efficacy of conservation and management measures. They shall revise those measures regularly in the light of new information. 5. For new or exploratory fisheries, members of the Commission shall adopt as soon as possible cautious conservation and management measures, including, inter alia, catch limits and effort limits. Such measures shall remain in force until there are sufficient data to allow assessment of the impact of the fisheries on the long- term sustainability of the stocks, whereupon conservation and management measures based on that assessment shall be implemented. The latter measures shall, if appropriate, allow for the gradual development of the fisheries. 6. If a natural phenomenon has a significant adverse impact on the status of highly migratory fish stocks, members of the Commission shall adopt conservation and management measures on an emergency basis to ensure that fishing activity does not exacerbate such adverse impacts. Members of the Commission shall also adopt such measures on an emergency basis where fishing activity presents a serious threat to the sustainability of such stocks. Measures taken on an emergency basis shall be temporary and shall be based on the best scientific information available. Article 7 Implementation of principles in areas under national jurisdiction 1. The principles and measures for conservati on and management enumerated in article 5 shall be applied by coastal States within areas under national jurisdiction in the Convention Area in the exercise of their sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing highly migratory fish stocks. 2. The members of the Commission shall give due consideration to the respective capacities of developing coastal States, in particular small island developing States, in the Convention Area to apply the provisions of articles 5 and 6 within areas under national jurisdiction and their need for assistance as provided for in this Convention. Article 8 Compatibility of conservation and management measures 1. Conservation and management measures established for the high seas and those a dopted for areas under national jurisdiction shall be compatible in order to ensure conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in their entirety. To this end, the members of the Commission have a duty to cooperate for the purpose of achieving compatible measures in respect of such stocks. 2. In establishing compatible conservation and management measures for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area, the Commission shall: (a) take into account the biological unity and other biolo gical characteristics of the stocks and the relationships between the distribution of the stocks, the fisheries and the geographical particularities of the region concerned, including the extent to which the stocks occur and are fished in areas under national jurisdiction; (b) take into account: (i) the conservation and management measures adopted and applied in accordance with article 61 of the 1982 Convention in respect of the same stocks by coastal States within areas under national jurisdiction and ensure that measures established in respect of such stocks for the Convention Area as a whole do not undermine the effectiveness of such measures; (ii) previously agreed measures established and applied in respect of the same stocks for the high seas which form part of the Convention Area by relevant coastal States and States fishing on the high seas in accordance with the 1982 Convention and the Agreement; (c) take into account previously agreed measures established and applied in accordance with the 1982 Convention and the Agreement in respect of the same stocks by a subregional or regional fisheries management organization or arrangement; (d) take into account the respective dependence of the coastal States and the States fishing on the high seas on the stocks concerned; and (e) ensure that such measures do not result in harmful impact on the living marine resources as a whole. 3. The coastal State shall ensure that the measures adopted and applied by it to highly migratory fish stocks within areas under its national jurisdiction do not undermine the effectiveness of measures adopted by the Commission under this Convention in respect of the same stocks. 4. Where there are areas of high seas in the Convention Area entirely surrounded by the exclusive economic zones of members of the Commission, the Commission shall, in giving effect to this article, pay special attention to ensuring compatibility between conservation and management measures established for such high seas areas and those established in respect of the same stocks in accordance with article 61 of the 1982 Convention by the surrounding coastal States in areas under national jurisdiction.

PART III COMMISSION FOR THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN

SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 9 Establishment of the Commission 1. There is hereby established the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, which shall function in accordance with the provisions of this Convention. 2. A fishing entity referred to in the Agreement, which has agreed to be bound by the regime established by this Convention in accordance with the provisions of Annex I, may participate in the work, including decision-making, of the Commission in accordance with the provisions of this article and Annex I. 3. The Commission shall hold an annual meeting. The Commission shall hold such other meetings as may be necessary to carry out its functions under this Convention. 4. The Commission shall elect a chairman and a vice-chairman from among the Contracting Parties, who shall be of different nationalities. They shall be elected for a period of two years and shall be eligible for re- election. The chairman and vice-chairman shall remain in office until the election of their successors. 5. The principle of cost-effectiveness shall apply to the frequency, duration and scheduling of meetings of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies. The Commission may, where appropriate, enter into contractual arrangements with relevant institutions to provide expert services necessary for the efficient functioning of the Commission and to enable it to carry out effectively its responsibilities under this Convention. 6. The Commission shall have international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary to perform its functions and achieve its objectives. The privileges and immunities which the Commission and its officers shall enjoy in the territory of a Contracting Party shall be determined by agreement between the Commission and the member concerned. 7. The Contracting Parties shall determine the location of the headquarters of the Commission and shall appoint its Executive Director. 8. The Commiss ion shall adopt, and amend as required, by consensus, rules of procedure for the conduct of its meetings, including meetings of its subsidiary bodies, and for the efficient exercise of its functions. Article 10 Functions of the Commission 1. Without prejudice to the sovereign rights of coastal States for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing highly migratory fish stocks within areas under national jurisdiction, the functions of the Commission shall be to: (a) determine the total a llowable catch or total level of fishing effort within the Convention Area for such highly migratory fish stocks as the Commission may decide and adopt such other conservation and management measures and recommendations as may be necessary to ensure the long-term sustainability of such stocks; (b) promote cooperation and coordination between members of the Commission to ensure that conservation and management measures for highly migratory fish stocks in areas under national jurisdiction and measures for the same stocks on the high seas are compatible; (c) adopt, where necessary, conservation and management measures and recommendations for non- target species and species dependent on or associated with the target stocks, with a view to maintaining or restoring populations of such species above levels at which their reproduction may become seriously threatened; (d) adopt standards for collection, verification and for the timely exchange and reporting of data on fisheries for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area in accordance with Annex I of the Agreement, which shall form an integral part of this Convention; (e) compile and disseminate accurate and complete statistical data to ensure that the best scientific information is available, while maintaining confidentiality, where appropriate; (f) obtain and evaluate scientific advice, review the status of stocks, promote the conduct of relevant scientific research and disseminate the results thereof; (g) develop, where necessary, criteria for the allocat ion of the total allowable catch or the total level of fishing effort for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area; (h) adopt generally recommended international minimum standards for the responsible conduct of fishing operations; (i) establish appropriate cooperative mechanisms for effective monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement, including a vessel monitoring system; (j) obtain and evaluate economic and other fisheries-related data and information relevant to the work of the Commission; (k) agree on means by which the fishing interests of any new member of the Commission may be accommodated; (l) adopt its rules of procedure and financial regulations and such other internal administrative regulations as may be necessary to carry out its functions; (m) consider and approve the proposed budget of the Commission; (n) promote the peaceful settlement of disputes; and (o) discuss any question or matter within the competence of the Commission and adopt any measures or recommendations necessary for achieving the objective of this Convention. 2. In giving effect to paragraph 1, the Commission may adopt measures relating to, inter alia: (a) the quantity of any species or stocks which may be caught; (b) the level of fishing effort; (c) limitations of fishing capacity, including measures relating to fishing vessel numbers, types and sizes; (d) the areas and periods in which fishing may occur; (e) the size of fish of any species which may be taken; (f) the fishing gear and technology which may be use d; and (g) particular subregions or regions. 3. In developing criteria for allocation of the total allowable catch or the total level of fishing effort the Commission shall take into account, inter alia: (a) the status of the stocks and the existing level of fishing effort in the fishery; (b) the respective interests, past and present fishing patterns and fishing practices of participants in the fishery and the extent of the catch being utilized for domestic consumption; (c) the historic catch in an area; (d) the needs of small island developing States, and territories and possessions, in the Convention Area whose economies, food supplies and livelihoods are overwhelmingly dependent on the exploitation of marine living resources; (e) the respective contribut ions of participants to conservation and management of the stocks, including the provision by them of accurate data and their contribution to the conduct of scientific research in the Convention Area; (f) the record of compliance by the participants with c onservation and management measures; (g) the needs of coastal communities which are dependent mainly on fishing for the stocks; (h) the special circumstances of a State which is surrounded by the exclusive economic zones of other States and has a limited exclusive economic zone of its own; (i) the geographical situation of a small island developing State which is made up of non-contiguous groups of islands having a distinct economic and cultural identity of their own but which are separated by areas of high seas; (j) the fishing interests and aspirations of coastal States, particularly small island developing States, and territories and possessions, in whose areas of national jurisdiction the stocks also occur. 4. The Commission may adopt decisions relating to the allocation of the total allowable catch or the total level of fishing effort. Such decisions, including decisions relating to the exclusion of vessel types, shall be taken by consensus. 5. The Commission shall take into account the reports and any recommendations of the Scientific Committee and the Technical and Compliance Committee on matters within their respective areas of competence. 6. The Commission shall promptly notify all members of the measures and recommendations decided upon by the Commission and shall give due publicity to the conservation and management measures adopted by it. Article 11 Subsidiary bodies of the Commission 1. There are hereby established as subsidiary bodies to the Commission a Scientific Committee and a Technical and Compliance Committee to provide advice and recommendations to the Commission on matters within their respective areas of competence. 2. Each member of the Commission shall be entitled to appoint one representative to each Committee who may be accompanied by other experts and advisers. Such representatives shall have appropriate qualifications or relevant experience in the area of competence of the Committee. 3. Each Committee shall meet as often as is required for the efficient exercise of its functions, provided that each Committee shall, in any event, meet prior to the annual meeting of the Commission and shall report to the annual meeting the results of its deliberations. 4. Each Committee shall make every effort to adopt its reports by consensus. If ev ery effort to achieve consensus has failed, the report shall indicate the majority and minority views and may include the differing views of the representatives of the members on all or any part of the report. 5. In the exercise of their functions, each Co mmittee may, where appropriate, consult any other fisheries management, technical or scientific organization with competence in the subject matter of such consultation and may seek expert advice as required on an ad hoc basis. 6. The Commission may establi sh such other subsidiary bodies as it deems necessary for the exercise of its functions, including working groups for the purpose of examining technical issues relating to particular species or stocks and reporting thereon to the Commission. 7. The Commiss ion shall establish a committee to make recommendations on the implementation of such conservation and management measures as may be adopted by the Commission for the area north of the 20° parallel of north latitude and on the formulation of such measures in respect of stocks which occur mostly in this area. The committee shall include the members situated in such area and those fishing in the area. Any member of the Commission not represented on the committee may send a representative to participate in the deliberations of the committee as an observer. Any extraordinary cost incurred for the work of the committee shall be borne by the members of the committee. The committee shall adopt recommendations to the Commission by consensus. In adopting measures in relation to particular stocks and species in such area, the decision of the Commission shall be based on any recommendations of the committee. Such recommendations shall be consistent with the general policies and measures adopted by the Commission in respect of the stocks or species in question and with the principles and measures for conservation and management set out in this Convention. If the Commission, in accordance with the rules of procedure for decision-making on matters of substance, does not accept the recommendation of the committee on any matter, it shall return the matter to the committee for further consideration. The committee shall reconsider the matter in the light of the views expressed by the Commission.

SECTION 2. SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION AND ADVICE Article 12 Functions of the Scientific Committee 1. The Scientific Committee is established to ensure that the Commission obtains for its consideration the best scientific information available. 2. The functions of the Committee shall be to: (a) recommend to the Commission a research plan, including specific issues and items to be addressed by the scientific experts or by other organizations or individuals, as appropriate, and identify data needs and coordinate activities that meet those needs; (b) review the assessments, analyses, other work and recommendations prepared for the Commission by the scientific experts prior to consideration of such recommendations by the Commission and provide information, advice and comments thereon, as necessary; (c) encourage and promote cooperation in scientific research, taking into account the provisions of article 246 of the 1982 Convention, in order to improve information on highly migratory fish stocks, non-target species, and species belonging to the same ecosystem or associated with or dependent upon such stocks in the Convention Area; (d) review the results of research and analyses of target stocks or non-target or associated or dependent species in the Convention Area; (e) report to the Commissi on its findings or conclusions on the status of target stocks or non-target or associated or dependent species in the Convention Area; (f) in consultation with the Technical and Compliance Committee, recommend to the Commission the priorities and objectives of the regional observer programme and assess the results of that programme; (g) make reports and recommendations to the Commission as directed, or on its own initiative, on matters concerning the conservation and management of and research on target stocks or non-target or associated or dependent species in the Convention Area; and (h) perform such other functions and tasks as may be requested by or assigned to it by the Commission. 3. The Committee shall exercise its functions in accordance with such gu idelines and directives as the Commission may adopt. 4. The representatives of the Oceanic Fisheries Programme of the Pacific Community and the Inter- American Tropical Tuna Commission, or their successor organizations, shall be invited to participate in the work of the Committee. The Committee may also invite other organizations or individuals with scientific expertise in matters related to the work of the Commission to participate in its meetings. Article 13 Scientific services 1. The Commission, taking i nto account any recommendation of the Scientific Committee, may engage the services of scientific experts to provide information and advice on the fishery resources covered by this Convention and related matters that may be relevant to the conservation and management of those resources. The Commission may enter into administrative and financial arrangements to utilize scientific services for this purpose. In this regard, and in order to carry out its functions in a cost-effective manner, the Commission shall, to the greatest extent possible, utilize the services of existing regional organizations and shall consult, as appropriate, with any other fisheries management, technical or scientific organization with expertise in matters related to the work of the Commission. 2. The scientific experts may, as directed by the Commission: (a) conduct scientific research and analyses in support of the work of the Commission; (b) develop and recommend to the Commission and the Scientific Committee stock-specific referen ce points for the species of principal interest to the Commission; (c) assess the status of stocks against the reference points established by the Commission; (d) provide the Commission and the Scientific Committee with reports on the results of their scie ntific work, advice and recommendations in support of the formulation of conservation and management measures and other relevant matters; and (e) perform such other functions and tasks as may be required. 3. In carrying out their work, the scientific exper ts may: (a) undertake the collection, compilation and dissemination of fisheries data according to agreed principles and procedures established by the Commission, including procedures and policies relating to the confidentiality, disclosure and publication of data; (b) conduct assessments of highly migratory fish stocks, non-target species, and species belonging to the same ecosystem or associated with or dependent upon such stocks, within the Convention Area; (c) assess the impacts of fishing, other human activities and environmental factors on target stocks and species belonging to the same ecosystem or dependent upon or associated with the target stocks; (d) assess the potential effects of proposed changes in the methods or levels of fishing and of proposed conservation and management measures; and (e) investigate such other scientific matters as may be referred to them by the Commission. 4. The Commission may make appropriate arrangements for periodic peer review of scientific information and advice provided to the Commission by the scientific experts. 5. The reports and recommendations of the scientific experts shall be provided to the Scientific Committee and to the Commission. SECTION 3. THE TECHNICAL AND COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE Article 14 Functions of the Technical and Compliance Committee 1. The functions of the Technical and Compliance Committee shall be to: (a) provide the Commission with information, technical advice and recommendations relating to the implementation of, and compliance with, conservation and management measures; (b) monitor and review compliance with conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission and make such recommendations to the Commission as may be necessary; and (c) review the implementation of cooperative measu res for monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement adopted by the Commission and make such recommendations to the Commission as may be necessary. 2. In carrying out its functions, the Committee shall: (a) provide a forum for exchange of information concerning the means by which they are applying the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission on the high seas and complementary measures in waters under national jurisdiction; (b) receive reports from each member of the Commission rel ating to measures taken to monitor, investigate and penalize violations of provisions of this Convention and measures adopted pursuant thereto; (c) in consultation with the Scientific Committee, recommend to the Commission the priorities and objectives of the regional observer programme, when established, and assess the results of that programme; (d) consider and investigate such other matters as may be referred to it by the Commission, including developing and reviewing measures to provide for the verification and validation of fisheries data; (e) make recommendations to the Commission on technical matters such as fishing vessel and gear markings; (f) in consultation with the Scientific Committee, make recommendations to the Commission on the fishing gear and technology which may be used; (g) report to the Commission its findings or conclusions on the extent of compliance with conservation and management measures; and (h) make recommendations to the Commission on matters relating to monitoring, control, surv eillance and enforcement. 3. The Committee may establish, with the approval of the Commission, such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary for the performance of its functions. 4. The Committee shall exercise its functions in accordance with such guidelines and directives as the Commission may adopt.

SECTION 4. THE SECRETARIAT Article 15 The Secretariat 1. The Commission may establish a permanent Secretariat consisting of an Executive Director and such other staff as the Commission may require. 2. The Executive Director shall be appointed for a term of four years and may be re-appointed for a further term of four years. 3. The Executive Director shall be the chief administrative officer of the Commission, and shall act in that capacity in all the meetings of the Commission and of any subsidiary body, and shall perform such other administrative functions as are entrusted to the Executive Director by the Commission. 4. The Secretariat functions shall include the following: (a) receiving and transmitting the Commission’s official communications; (b) facilitating the compilation and dissemination of data necessary to accomplish the objective of this Convention; (c) preparing administrative and other reports for the Commission and the Scientific and Technical and Compliance Committees; (d) administering agreed arrangements for monitoring, control and surveillance and the provision of scientific advice; (e) publishing the decisions of and promoting the activities of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies; and (f) treasury, personnel and other administrative functions. 5. In order to minimize costs to the members of the Commission, the Secretariat to be established under this Convention shall be cost effective. The setting up and the functioning of the Secretariat shall, where appropriate, take into account the capacity of existing regional institutions to perform certain technical secretariat functions. Article 16 The staff of the Commission 1. The staff of the Commission shall consist of such qualified scientific a nd technical and other personnel as may be required to fulfil the functions of the Commission. The staff shall be appointed by the Executive Director. 2. The paramount consideration in the recruitment and employment of the staff shall be the necessity of securing the highest standards of efficiency, competence and integrity. Subject to this consideration, due regard shall be paid to the importance of recruiting the staff on an equitable basis between the members of the Commission with a view to ensuring a broad-based Secretariat.

SECTION 5. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE COMMISSION Article 17 Funds of the Commission 1. The funds of the Commission shall include: (a) assessed contributions in accordance with article 18, paragraph 2; (b) voluntary contributions; (c) the fund referred to in article 30, paragraph 3; and (d) any other funds which the Commission may receive. 2. The Commission shall adopt, and amend as required, by consensus, financial regulations for the administration of the Commission and for the exercise of its functions. Article 18 Budget of the Commission 1. The Executive Director shall draft the proposed budget of the Commission and submit it to the Commission. The proposed budget shall indicate which of the administrative expenses of the Commission are to be financed from the assessed contributions referred to in article 17, paragraph 1 (a), and which such expenses are to be financed from funds received pursuant to article 17, paragraphs 1 (b), (c) and (d). The Commission shall adopt the budget by consensus. If the Commission is unable to adopt a decision on the budget, the level of contributions to the administrative budget of the Commission shall be determined in accordance with the budget for the preceding year for the purposes of meeting the administrative expenses of the Commission for the following year until such time as a new budget can be adopted by consensus. 2. The amount of the contribution to the budget shall be determined in accordance with a scheme which the Commission shall adopt, and amend as required, by consensus. In adopting the scheme, due consideration shall be given to each member being assessed an equal basic fee, a fee based upon national wealth, reflecting the state of development of the member concerned and its ability to pay, and a variable fee. The variable fee shall be based, inter alia, on the total catch taken within exclusive economic zones and in areas beyond national jurisdiction in the Convention Area of such species as may be specified by the Commission, provided that a discount factor shall be applied to the catch taken in the exclusive economic zone of a member of the Commission which is a developing State or territory by vessels flying the flag of that member. The scheme adopted by the Commission shall be set out in the financial regulations of the Commission. 3. If a contributor is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Commission it shall not participate in the taking of decisions by the Commission if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. Interest shall be payable on such unpaid contributions at such rate as may be determined by the Commission in its financial regulations. The Commission may, nevertheless, waive such interest payments and permit such a member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the member. Article 19 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Commission, including its annual financial statement, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor appointed by the Commission.

SECTION 6. DECISION-MAKING Article 20 Decision-making 1. As a general rule, decision-making in the Commission shall be by consensus. For t he purposes of this article, “consensus” means the absence of any formal objection made at the time the decision was taken. 2. Except where this Convention expressly provides that a decision shall be made by consensus, if all efforts to reach a decision by consensus have been exhausted, decisions by voting on questions of procedure shall be taken by a majority of those present and voting. Decisions on questions of substance shall be taken by a three- fourths majority of those present and voting provided that such majority includes a three-fourths majority of the members of the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency present and voting and a three-fourths majority of non- members of the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency present and voting and provided further that in no circumstances shall a proposal be defeated by two or fewer votes in either chamber. When the issue arises as to whether a question is one of substance or not, that question shall be treated as one of substance unless otherwise decided by the Commission by consensus or by the majority required for decisions on questions of substance. 3. If it appears to the Chairman that all efforts to reach a decision by consensus have been exhausted, the Chairman shall fix a time during that session of the Commission for taking the decision by a vote. At the request of any representative, the Commission may, by a majority of those present and voting, defer the taking of a decision until such time during the same session as the Commission may decide. At that time, the Commission shall take a vote on the deferred question. This rule may be applied only once to any question. 4. Where this Convention expressly provides that a decision on a proposal shall be taken by consensus and the Chairman determines that there would be an objection to such proposal, the Commission may appoint a conciliator for the purpose of reconciling the differences in order to achieve consensus on the matter. 5. Subject to paragraphs 6 and 7, a decision adopted by the Commission shall becom e binding 60 days after the date of its adoption. 6. A member which has voted against a decision or which was absent during the meeting at which the decision was made may, within 30 days of the adoption of the decision by the Commission, seek a review of the decision by a review panel constituted in accordance with the procedures set out in Annex II to this Convention on the grounds that: (a) the decision is inconsistent with the provisions of this Convention, the Agreement or the 1982 Convention; or (b) the decision unjustifiably discriminates in form or in fact against the member concerned. 7. Pending the findings and recommendations of the review panel and any action required by the Commission, no member of the Commission shall be required to give effect to the decision in question. 8. If the review panel finds that the decision of the Commission need not be modified, amended or revoked, the decision shall become binding 30 days from the date of communication by the Executive Director of the findings and recommendations of the review panel. 9. If the review panel recommends to the Commission that the decision be modified, amended or revoked, the Commission shall, at its next annual meeting, modify or amend its decision in order to conform with the findings and recommendations of the review panel or it may decide to revoke the decision, provided that, if so requested in writing by a majority of the members, a special meeting of the Commission shall be convened within 60 days of the date of communication of the findings and recommendations of the review panel.

SECTION 7. TRANSPARENCY AND COOPERATION WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Article 21 Transparency The Commission shall promote transparency in its decision-making processes and other activities. Representatives from intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations concerned with matters relevant to the implementation of this Convention shall be afforded the opportunity to participate in the meetings of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies as observers or otherwise as appropriate. The rules of procedure of the Commission shall provide for such participation. The procedures shall not be unduly restrictive in this respect. Such intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations shall be given timely access to pertinent information subject to the rules and procedures which the Commission may adopt. Article 22 Cooperation with other organizations 1. The Commission shall cooperate, as appropriate, with the Food and Agriculture Org anization of the United Nations and with other specialized agencies and bodies of the United Nations on matters of mutual interest. 2. The Commission shall make suitable arrangements for consultation, cooperation and collaboration with other relevant intergovernmental organizations, particularly those which have related objectives and which can contribute to the attainment of the objective of this Convention, such as the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. 3. Where the Convention Area overlaps with an area under regulation by another fisheries management organization, the Commission shall cooperate with such other organization in order to avoid the duplication of measures in respect of species in that area which are regulated by both organizations. 4. The Commission shall cooperate with the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission to ensure that the objective set out in article 2 of this Convention is reached. To that end, the Commission shall initiate consultation with the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission with a view to reaching agreement on a consistent set of conservation and management measures, including measures relating to monitoring, control and surveillance, for fish stocks that occur in the Convention Areas of both organizations. 5. The Commission may enter into relationship agreements with the organizations referred to in this article and with other organizations as may be appropriate, such as the Pacific Community and the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency, with a view to obtaining the best available scientific and other fisheries-related information to further the attainment of the objective of this Convention and to minimize duplication with respect to their work. 6. Any organization with which the Commission has entered into an arrangement or agreement under paragraphs 1, 2 and 5 may designate representatives to attend meetings of the Commission as observers in accordance with the rules of procedure of the Commission. Procedures shall be established for obtaining the views of such organizations in appropriate cases. PART IV OBLIGATIONS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION Article 23 Obligations of members of the Commission 1. Each member of the Commission shall promptly implement the provisions of this Convention and any conservation, management and other measures or matters which may be agreed pursuant to this Convention from time to time and shall cooperate in furthering the objective of this Convention. 2. Each member of the Commission shall: (a) provide annually to the Commission statistical, biological and other data and information in accordance with Annex I of the Agreement and, in addition, such data and information as the Commission may require; (b) provide to the Commission in the manner and at such intervals as may be required by the Commission, information concerning its fishing activities in the Convention Area, including fishing areas and fishing vessels in order to facilitate the compilation of reliable catch and effort statistics; and (c) provide to the Commission at such intervals as may be required information on steps taken to implement the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. 3. The members of the Commission shall keep the Commission informed of the measures they have adopted for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in areas within the Convention Area under their national jurisdiction. The Commission shall circulate periodically such information to all members. 4. Each member of the Commission shall keep the Commission informed of the measures it has adopted for regulating the activities of fishing vessels flying its flag which fish in the Convention Area. The Commission shall circulate periodically such information to all members. 5. Each member of the Commission shall, to the greatest extent possible, take measures to ensure that its nationals, and fishing vessels owned or controlled by its nationals fishing in the Convention Area, comply with the provisions of this Convention. To this end, members of the Commission may enter into agreements with States whose flags such vessels are flying to facilitate such enforcement. Each member of the Commission shall, to the greatest extent possible, at the request of any other member, and when provided with the relevant information, investigate any alleged violation by its nationals, or fishing vessels owned or controlled by its nationals, of the provisions of this Convention or any conservation and management measure adopted by the Commission. A report on the progress of the investigation, including details of any action taken or proposed to be taken in relation to the alleged violation, shall be provided to the member making the request and to the Commission as soon as practicable and in any case within two months of such request and a report on the outcome of the investigation shall be provided when the investigation is completed.

PART V DUTIES OF THE FLAG STATE Article 24 Flag State duties 1. Each member of the Commission shall take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that: (a) fishing vessels flying its flag comply with the provisions of this Conven tion and the conservation and management measures adopted pursuant hereto and that such vessels do not engage in any activity which undermine the effectiveness of such measures; and (b) fishing vessels flying its flag do not conduct unauthorized fishing wi thin areas under the national jurisdiction of any Contracting Party. 2. No member of the Commission shall allow any fishing vessel entitled to fly its flag to be used for fishing for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area beyond areas of national jurisdiction unless it has been authorized to do so by the appropriate authority or authorities of that member. A member of the Commission shall authorize the use of vessels flying its flag for fishing in the Convention Area beyond areas of national jurisdiction only where it is able to exercise effectively its responsibilities in respect of such vessels under the 1982 Convention, the Agreement and this Convention. 3. It shall be a condition of every authorization issued by a member of the Commission that the fishing vessel in respect of which the authorization is issued: (a) conducts fishing within areas under the national jurisdiction of other States only where the fishing vessel holds any licence, permit or authorization that may be required by such other State; and (b) is operated on the high seas in the Convention Area in accordance with the requirements of Annex III, the requirements of which shall also be established as a general obligation of all vessels operating pursuant to this Convention. 4. Each member of the Commission shall, for the purposes of effective implementation of this Convention, maintain a record of fishing vessels entitled to fly its flag and authorized to be used for fishing in the Convention Area beyond its area of national jurisdiction, and shall ensure that all such fishing vessels are entered in that record. 5. Each member of the Commission shall provide annually to the Commission, in accordance with such procedures as may be agreed by the Commission, the information set out in Annex IV to this Convention with respect to each fishing vessel entered in the record required to be maintained under paragraph 4 and shall promptly notify the Commission of any modifications to such information. 6. Each member of the Commission shall also promptly inform the Commission of: (a) any additions to the record; (b) any deletions from the record by reason of: (i) the voluntary relinquishment or non-renewal of the fishing authorization by the fishing vessel owner or operator; (ii) the withdra wal of the fishing authorization issued in respect of the fishing vessel under paragraph 2; (iii) the fact that the fishing vessel concerned is no longer entitled to fly its flag; (iv) the scrapping, decommissioning or loss of the fishing vessel concerned; and (v) any other reason, specifying which of the reasons listed above is applicable. 7. The Commission shall maintain its own record, based on the information provided to it pursuant to paragraphs 5 and 6, of fishing vessels referred to in paragraph 4. The Commission shall circulate periodically the information contained in such record to all members of the Commission, and, on request, individually to any member. 8. Each member of the Commission shall require its fishing vessels that fish for highly mig ratory fish stocks on the high seas in the Convention Area to use near real-time satellite position-fixing transmitters while in such areas. The standards, specifications and procedures for the use of such transmitters shall be established by the Commission, which shall operate a vessel monitoring system for all vessels that fish for highly migratory fish stocks on the high seas in the Convention Area. In establishing such standards, specifications and procedures, the Commission shall take into account the characteristics of traditional fishing vessels from developing States. The Commission, directly, and simultaneously with the flag State where the flag State so requires, or through such other organization designated by the Commission, shall receive information from the vessel monitoring system in accordance with the procedures adopted by the Commission. The procedures adopted by the Commission shall include appropriate measures to protect the confidentiality of information received through the vessel monitoring system. Any member of the Commission may request that waters under its national jurisdiction be included within the area covered by such vessel monitoring system. 9. Each member of the Commission shall require its fishing vessels that fish in the Convention Area in areas under the national jurisdiction of another member to operate near real-time satellite position-fixing transmitters in accordance with the standards, specification and procedures to be determined by the coastal State. 10. The membe rs of the Commission shall cooperate to ensure compatibility between national and high seas vessel monitoring systems.

PART VI COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT Article 25 Compliance and enforcement 1. Each member of the Commission shall enforce the provisions of this Convention and any conservation and management measures issued by the Commission. 2. Each member of the Commission shall, at the request of any other member, and when provided with the relevant information, investigate fully any alleged violation by fishing vessels flying its flag of the provisions of this Convention or any conservation and management measure adopted by the Commission. A report on the progress of the investigation, including details of any action taken or proposed to be taken in relation to the alleged violation, shall be provided to the member making the request and to the Commission as soon as practicable and in any case within two months of such request and a report on the outcome of the investigation shall be provided when the investigation is completed. 3. Each member of the Commission shall, if satisfied that sufficient evidence is available in respect of an alleged violation by a fishing vessel flying its flag, refer the case to its authorities with a view to instituting proceedings without delay in accordance with its laws and, where appropriate, detain the vessel concerned. 4. Each member of the Commission shall ensure that, where it has been established, in accordance with its laws, that a fishing vessel flying its flag has been involved in the commission of a serious violation of the provisions of this Convention or of any conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission, the vessel concerned ceases fishing activities and does not engage in such activities in the Convention Area until such time as all outstanding sanctions imposed by the flag State in respect of the violation have been complied with. Where the vessel concerned has conducted unauthorized fishing within areas under the national jurisdiction of any coastal State Party to this Convention, the flag State shall, in accordance with its laws, ensure that the vessel complies promptly with any sanctions which may be imposed by such coastal State in accordance with its national laws and regulations or shall impose appropriate sanctions in accordance with paragraph 7. For the purposes of this article, a serious violation shall include any of the violations specified in article 21, paragraphs 11 (a) to (h) of the Agreement and such other violations as may be determined by the Commission. 5. Each member of the Commission shall, to the extent permitted by its national laws and regulations, establish arrangements for making available to prosecuting authorities of other members evidence relating to alleged violations. 6. Where there are reasonable grounds for believing that a fishing vessel on the high seas has engaged in unauthorized fishing within an area under the national jurisdiction of a member of the Commission, the flag State of that vessel, at the request of the member concerned, shall immediately and fully investigate the matter. The flag State shall cooperate with the member concerned in taking appropriate enforcement action in such cases and may authorize the relevant authorities of such member to board and inspect the vessel on the high seas. This paragraph is without prejudice to article 111 of the 1982 Convention. 7. All investigations and judicial proceedings shall be carried out expeditiously. Sanctions applicable in respect of violations shall be adequate in severity to be effective in securing compliance and to discourage violations wherever they occur and shall deprive offenders of the benefits accruing from their illegal activities. Measures applicable in respect of masters and other officers of fishing vessels shall include provisions which may permit, inter alia, refusal, withdrawal or suspension of authorizations to serve as masters or officers on such vessels. 8. Each member shall transmit to the Commission an annual statement of compliance measures, including imposition of sanctions for any violations, it has taken in accordance with this article. 9. The provisions of this article are without prejudice to: (a) the rights of any of the members of the Commission in accordance with their nation al laws and regulations relating to fisheries, including the right to impose appropriate sanctions on the vessel concerned in respect of violations occurring within areas under national jurisdiction in accordance with such national laws and regulations; and (b) the rights of any of the members of the Commission in relation to any provision relating to compliance and enforcement contained in any relevant bilateral or multilateral fisheries access agreement not inconsistent with the provisions of this Convention, the Agreement or the 1982 Convention. 10. Each member of the Commission, where it has reasonable grounds for believing that a fishing vessel flying the flag of another State has engaged in any activity that undermines the effectiveness of conservation and management measures adopted for the Convention Area, shall draw this to the attention of the flag State concerned and may, as appropriate, draw the matter to the attention of the Commission. To the extent permitted by its national laws and regulations it shall provide the flag State with full supporting evidence and may provide the Commission with a summary of such evidence. The Commission shall not circulate such information until such time as the flag State has had an opportunity to comment, within a reasonable time, on the allegation and evidence submitted, or to object as the case may be. 11. The members of the Commission may take action in accordance with the Agreement and international law, including through procedures adopted by the Commission for this purpose, to deter fishing vessels which have engaged in activities which undermine the effectiveness of or otherwise violate the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission from fishing in the Convention Area until such time as appropriate action is taken by the flag State. 12. The Commission, when necessary, shall develop procedures which allow for non-discriminatory trade measures to be taken, consistent with the international obligations of the members of the Commission, on any species regulated by the Commission, against any State or entity whose fishing vessels fish in a manner which undermines the effectiveness of the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. Article 26 Boarding and inspection 1. For the purposes of ensuring compliance with conservation and management measures, the Commission shall establish procedures for boarding and inspection of fishing vessels on the high seas in the Convention Area. All vessels used for boarding and inspection of fishing vessels on the high seas in the Convention Area shall be clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to undertake high seas boarding and inspection in accordance with this Convention. 2. If, within two years of the entry into force of this Convention, the Commission is not able to agree on such procedures, or on an alternative mechanism which effectively discharges the obligations of the members of the Commission under the Agreement and this Convention to ensure compliance with the conservation and management measures established by the Commission, articles 21 and 22 of the Agreement shall be applied, subject to paragraph 3, as if they were part of this Convention and boarding and inspection of fishing vessels in the Convention Area, as well as any subsequent enforcement action, shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures set out therein and such additional practical procedures as the Commission may decide are necessary for the implementation of articles 21 and 22 of the Agreement. 3. Each member of the Commission shall ensure that fishing vessels flying its flag accept boarding by duly authorized inspectors in accordance with such procedures. Such duly authorized inspectors shall comply with the procedures for boarding and inspection. Article 27 Measures taken by a port State 1. A port State has the right and the duty to take measures, in accordance with international law, to promote the effectiveness of subregional, regional and global conservation and management measures. When taking such measures a port State shall not discriminate in form or in fact against the fishing vessels of any State. 2. Whenever a fishing vessel of a member of the Commission voluntarily enters a port or offshore terminal of another member, the port State may, inter alia, inspect documents, fishing gear and catch on board such fishing vessel. 3. Members of the Commission may adopt regulations empowering the relevant national authorities to prohibit landings and transhipments where it has been established that the catch has been taken in a manner which undermines the effectiveness of conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. 4. Nothing in this article affects the exercise by Contracting Parties of their sovereignt y over ports in their territory in accordance with international law.

PART VII REGIONAL OBSERVER PROGRAMME AND REGULATION OF TRANSHIPMENT Article 28 Regional observer programme 1. The Commission shall develop a regional observer programme to collect verifi ed catch data, other scientific data and additional information related to the fishery from the Convention Area and to monitor the implementation of the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. 2. The observer programme shall be coor dinated by the Secretariat of the Commission, and shall be organized in a flexible manner which takes into account the nature of the fishery and other relevant factors. In this regard, the Commission may enter into contracts for the provision of the regional observer programme. 3. The regional observer programme shall consist of independent and impartial observers authorized by the Secretariat of the Commission. The programme should be coordinated, to the maximum extent possible, with other regional, subregional and national observer programmes. 4. Each member of the Commission shall ensure that fishing vessels flying its flag in the Convention Area, except for vessels that operate exclusively within waters under the national jurisdiction of the flag State, are prepared to accept an observer from the regional observer programme, if required by the Commission. 5. The provisions of paragraph 4 shall apply to vessels fishing exclusively on the high seas in the Convention Area, vessels fishing on the high seas and in waters under the jurisdiction of one or more coastal States, and vessels fishing in waters under the jurisdiction of two or more coastal States. When a vessel is operating on the same fishing trip both in waters under the national jurisdiction of its flag State and in the adjacent high seas, an observer placed under the regional observer programme shall not undertake any of the activities specified in paragraph 6 (e) when the vessel is in waters under the national jurisdiction of its flag State, unless the flag State of the vessel agrees otherwise. 6. The regional observer programme shall operate in accordance with the following guidelines and under the conditions set out in article 3 of Annex III of this Convention: (a) the programme shall provide a sufficient level of coverage to ensure that the Commission receives appropriate data and information on catch levels and related matters within the Convention Area, taking into account the characteristics of the fisheries; (b) each member of the Commissio n shall be entitled to have its nationals included in the programme as observers; (c) observers shall be trained and certified in accordance with uniform procedures to be approved by the Commission; (d) observers shall not unduly interfere with the lawful operations of the vessel and, in carrying out their functions, they shall give due consideration to the operational requirements of the vessel and shall communicate regularly with the captain or master for this purpose; (e) the activities of observers shall include collecting catch data and other scientific data, monitoring the implementation of conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission and reporting of their findings in accordance with procedures to be developed by the Commission; (f) the programme shall be cost effective, shall avoid duplication with existing regional, subregional and national observer programmes, and shall, to the extent practicable, seek to minimize disruption to the operations of vessels fishing in the Convention Area; (g) a reasonable period of notice of the placement of an observer shall be given. 7. The Commission shall develop further procedures and guidelines for the operation of the regional observer programme, including: (a) to ensure the security of non-aggr egated data and other information which the Commission deems to be of a confidential nature; (b) for the dissemination of data and information collected by observers to the members of the Commission; (c) for boarding of observers which clearly define the r ights and responsibilities of the captain or master of the vessel and the crew when an observer is on board a vessel, as well as the rights and responsibilities of observers in the performance of their duties. 8. The Commission shall determine the manner i n which the costs of the observer programme would be defrayed. Article 29 Transhipment 1. In order to support efforts to ensure accurate reporting of catches, the members of the Commission shall encourage their fishing vessels, to the extent practicable, to conduct transhipment in port. A member may designate one or more of its ports as transhipment ports for the purposes of this Convention, and the Commission shall circulate periodically to all members a list of such designated ports. 2. Transhipment at a port or in an area within waters under the national jurisdiction of a member of the Commission shall take place in accordance with applicable national laws. 3. The Commission shall develop procedures to obtain and verify data on the quantity and species transhipped both in port and at sea in the Convention Area and procedures to determine when transhipment covered by this Convention has been completed. 4. Transhipment at sea in the Convention Area beyond areas under national jurisdiction shall take place only in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in article 4 of Annex III to this Convention, and any procedures established by the Commission pursuant to paragraph 3 of this article. Such procedures shall take into account the characteristics of the fishery concerned. 5. Notwithstanding paragraph 4 above, and subject to specific exemptions which the Commission adopts in order to reflect existing operations, transhipment at sea by purse-seine vessels operating within the Convention Area shall be prohibited.

PART VIII REQUIREMENTS OF DEVELOPING STATES Article 30 Recognition of the special requirements of developing States 1. The Commission shall give full recognition to the special requirements of developing States Parties to this Convention, in particular small island developing States, and of territories and possessions, in relation to conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area and development of fisheries for such stocks. 2. In giving effect to the duty to co operate in the establishment of conservation and management measures for highly migratory fish stocks, the Commission shall take into account the special requirements of developing States Parties, in particular small island developing States, and of territories and possessions, in particular: (a) the vulnerability of developing States Parties, in particular small island developing States, which are dependent on the exploitation of marine living resources, including for meeting the nutritional requirements of their populations or parts thereof; (b) the need to avoid adverse impacts on, and ensure access to fisheries by, subsistence, small-scale and artisanal fishers and fishworkers, as well as indigenous people in developing States Parties, particularly small island developing States Parties, and territories and possessions; and (c) the need to ensure that such measures do not result in transferring, directly or indirectly, a disproportionate burden of conservation action onto developing States Parties, and territories and possessions. 3. The Commission shall establish a fund to facilitate the effective participation of developing States Parties, particularly small island developing States, and, where appropriate, territories and possessions, in the work of the Commission, including its meetings and those of its subsidiary bodies. The financial regulations of the Commission shall include guidelines for the administration of the fund and criteria for eligibility for assistance. 4. Cooperation with developing Sta tes, and territories and possessions, for the purposes set out in this article may include the provision of financial assistance, assistance relating to human resources development, technical assistance, transfer of technology, including through joint venture arrangements, and advisory and consultative services. Such assistance shall, inter alia, be directed towards: (a) improved conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks through collection, reporting, verification, exchange and analysis of fisheries data and related information; (b) stock assessment and scientific research; and (c) monitoring, control, surveillance, compliance and enforcement, including training and capacity- building at the local level, development and funding of national and regional observer programmes and access to technology and equipment.

PART IX PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES Article 31 Procedures for the settlement of disputes The provisions relating to the settlement of disputes set out in Part VIII of the Agreement apply, mutatis mutandis, to any dispute between members of the Commission, whether or not they are also Parties to the Agreement.

PART X NON-PARTIES TO THIS CONVENTION Article 32 Non-parties to this Convention 1. Each member of the Commission shall take measures consistent with this Convention, the Agreement and international law to deter the activities of vessels flying the flags of non-parties to this Convention which undermine the effectiveness of conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. 2. The members of the Commission shall exchange information on the activities of fishing vessels flying the flags of non-parties to this Convention which are engaged in fishing operations in the Convention Area. 3. The Commission shall draw the at tention of any State which is not a Party to this Convention to any activity undertaken by its nationals or vessels flying its flag which, in the opinion of the Commission, affects the implementation of the objective of this Convention. 4. The members of t he Commission shall, individually or jointly, request non-parties to this Convention whose vessels fish in the Convention Area to cooperate fully in the implementation of conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission with a view to ensuring that such measures are applied to all fishing activities in the Convention Area. Such cooperating non-parties to this Convention shall enjoy benefits from participation in the fishery commensurate with their commitment to comply with, and their record of compliance with, conservation and management measures in respect of the relevant stocks. 5. Non-parties to this Convention, may, upon request and subject to the concurrence of the members of the Commission and to the rules of procedure relating to the granting of observer status, be invited to attend meetings of the Commission as observers. PART XI GOOD FAITH AND ABUSE OF RIGHTS Article 33 Good faith and abuse of rights The obligations assumed under this Convention shall be fulfilled in good faith and the rights recognized in this Convention shall be exercised in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of right.

PART XII FINAL PROVISIONS Article 34 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval 1. This Convention shall be open for signature by Australi a, Canada, China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji Islands, France, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Republic of Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Republic of Palau, Independent State of Papua New Guinea, Republic of the Philippines, Republic of Korea, Independent State of Samoa, Solomon Islands, Kingdom of Tonga, Tuvalu, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in respect of Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands, United States of America and Republic of Vanuatu and shall remain open for signature for twelve months from the fifth day of September 2000. 2. This Convention is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by the signatories. 3. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or appr oval shall be deposited with the depositary. 4. Each Contracting Party shall be a member of the Commission established by this Convention. Article 35 Accession 1. This Convention shall remain open for accession by the States referred to in article 34, par agraph 1, and by any entity referred to in article 305, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (c), (d) and (e) of the 1982 Convention which is situated in the Convention Area. 2. After the entry into force of this Convention, the Contracting Parties may, by consensus , invite other States and regional economic integration organizations, whose nationals and fishing vessels wish to conduct fishing for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area to accede to this Convention. 3. Instruments of accession shall be de posited with the depositary. Article 36 Entry into force 1. This Convention shall enter into force 30 days after the deposit of instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession by: (a) three States situated north of the 20 ° parallel of north latitude; and (b) seven States situated south of the 20 ° parallel of north latitude. 2. If, within three years of its adoption, this Convention has not been ratified by three of the States referred to in paragraph 1 (a), this Convention shall enter into force six months after the deposit of the thirteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession or in accordance with paragraph 1, whichever is the earlier. 3. For each State, entity referred to in article 305, paragraph 1, subparagraphs ( c), (d) and (e) of the 1982 Convention which is situated in the Convention Area, or regional economic integration organization which ratifies, formally confirms, accepts or approves the Convention or accedes thereto after the entry into force of this Convention, this Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the deposit of its instrument of ratification, formal confirmation, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 37 Reservations and exceptions No reservations or exceptions may be made to this Convention. Article 38 Declarations and statements Article 37 does not preclude a State, entity referred to in article 305, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (c), (d) and (e) of the 1982 Convention which is situated in the Convention Area, or regional economic integration organization, when signing, ratifying or acceding to this Convention, from making declarations or statements, however phrased or named, with a view, inter alia, to the harmonization of its laws and regulations with the provisions of this Convention, provided that such declarations or statements do not purport to exclude or to modify the legal effect of the provisions of this Convention in their application to that State, entity or regional economic integration organization. Article 39 Relation to other agreements This Convention shall not alter the rights and obligations of Contracting Parties, and fishing entities referred to in article 9, paragraph 2, which arise from other agreements compatible with this Convention and which do not affect the enjoyment by other Contracting Parties of their rights or the performance of their obligations under this Convention. Article 40 Amendment 1. Any member of the Commission may propose amendments to this Convention to be considered by the Commission. Any such proposal shall be made by written communication addressed to the Executive Director at least 60 days before the meeting of the Commission at which it is to be considered. The Executive Director shall promptly circulate such communication to all members of the Commission. 2. Amendments to this Convention shall be considered at the annual meeting of the Commission unless a majority of the members request a special meeting to consider the proposed amendment. A special meeting may be convened on not less than 60 days notice. Amendments to this Convention shall be adopted by consensus. The text of any amendment adopted by the Commission shall be transmitted promptly by the Executive Director to all members of the Commission. 3. Amendments to this Convention shall enter into force for the Contracting Parties ratifying or acceding to them on the thirtieth day following the deposit of instruments of ratification or accession by a majority of Contracting Parties. Thereafter, for each Contracting Party ratifying or acceding to an amendment after the deposit of the required number of such instruments, the amendment shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the deposit of its instrument of ratification or accession. Article 41 Annexes 1. The Annexes form an integral part of this Convention and, unless expressly provided otherwise, a reference to this Convention or to one of its Parts includes a reference to the Annexes relating thereto. 2. The Annexes to this Convention may be revised from time to time and any member of the Commission may propose revisions to an Annex. Notwithstanding the provisions of article 40, if a revision to an Annex is adopted by consensus at a meeting of the Commission, it shall be incorporated in this Convention and shall take effect from the date of its adoption or from such other date as may be specified in the revision. Article 42 Withdrawal 1. A Contracting Party may, by written notification addressed to the depositary, withdraw from this Convention and may indicate its reasons. Failure to indicate reasons shall not affect the validity of the withdrawal. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. Withdrawal from this Convention by a Contracting Party shall not affect the financial obligations of such member incurred prior to its withdrawal becoming effective. 3. Withdrawal from this Convention by a Contracting Party shall not in any way affect the duty of such member to fulfil any obligation embodied in this Convention to which it would be subject under international law independently of this Convention. Article 43 Participation by territories 1. The Commission and its subsidiary bodies shall be open to participati on, with the appropriate authorization of the Contracting Party having responsibility for its international affairs, to each of the following: American Samoa French Polynesia Guam New Caledonia Northern Mariana Islands Tokelau Wallis and Futuna 2. The nature and extent of such participation shall be provided for by the Contracting Parties in separate rules of procedure of the Commission, taking into account international law, the distribution of competence on matters covered by this Convention and the evolution in the capacity of such territory to exercise rights and responsibilities under this Convention. 3. Notwithstanding paragraph 2, all such participants shall be entitled to participate fully in the work of the Commission, including the right to be present and to speak at the meetings of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies. In the performance of its functions, and in taking decisions, the Commission shall take into account the interests of all participants. Article 44 Depositary The Government of New Zealand shall be the depositary of this Convention and any amendments or revisions thereto. The depositary shall register this Convention with the Secretary-General of the United Nations in accordance with article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries, being duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention. DONE at Honolulu this fifth day of September, two thousand, in a single original. ANNEX I. FISHING ENTITIES 1. After the entry in to force of this Convention, any fishing entity whose vessels fish for highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area, may, by a written instrument delivered to the depositary, agree to be bound by the regime established by this Convention. Such agreement shall become effective thirty days following the delivery of the instrument. Any such fishing entity may withdraw such agreement by written notification addressed to the depositary. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. Such fishing entity shall participate in the work of the Commission, including decision-making, and shall comply with the obligations under this Convention. References thereto by the Commission or members of the Commission include, for the purposes of this Convention, such fishing entity as well as Contracting Parties. 3. If a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention involving a fishing entity cannot be settled by agreement between the parties to the dispute, the dispute shall, at the request of either party to the dispute, be submitted to final and binding arbitration in accordance with the relevant rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. 4. The provisions of this Annex relating to participation by fishing entities are solely for the purposes of this Convention.

ANNEX II. REVIEW PANEL 1. In accordance with article 20, paragraph 6, an application for review of a decision of the Commission shall be submitted within 30 days of the adoption of the decision by written notification to the Executive Director. Such notification shall be accompanied by a statement of the grounds upon which the review is sought. The Executive Director shall circulate copies of the notification and the accompanying statement to all members of the Commission. 2. The review panel shall be constituted as follows: (a) The review panel shall consist of three members appointed in accordance with this Annex from the list of experts in the field of fisheries drawn up and maintained by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations pursuant to Annex VIII, article 2, of the 1982 Convention or a similar list maintained by the Executive Director; (b) The member of the Commiss ion submitting the application for review (“the applicant”) shall appoint one member, who may or may not be its national. The appointment shall be included in the written notification referred to in paragraph 1; (c) Where more than one member of the Commi ssion is seeking review of the same decision, such members shall, within 20 days of receipt of the first notification submitted, appoint one member of the panel jointly by agreement, irrespective of the grounds upon which review is sought by each applicant. If the members concerned are unable to reach agreement on the appointment, the appointment shall be made in accordance with subparagraph (f), at the request of any such member; (d) The chairman of the Commission shall, within 20 days of receipt of the n otification referred to in paragraph 1 of this Annex, appoint one member; (e) The other member shall be appointed by agreement between the member or members of the Commission seeking the review and the chairman of the Commission. They shall appoint the President of the review panel from among those three members. If, within 20 days of receipt of the notification referred to in paragraph 1 of this Annex, the member or members seeking the review and the chairman of the Commission are unable to reach agreement on the appointment of one or more members of the panel to be appointed by agreement, or on the appointment of the President of the review panel, the remaining appointment or appointments shall be made in accordance with subparagraph (f), at the request of any party. Such request shall be made within 10 days of the expiration of the aforementioned 20 day period; (f) Unless the parties agree that any appointment under subparagraphs (c), (d) and (e) of this paragraph be made by a person or a third State chosen by the parties, the President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea shall make the necessary appointments. (g) Any vacancy shall be filled in the manner described for the initial appointment. 3. A hearing shall be convened at a place an d on a date to be determined by the panel within 30 days following the constitution of the review panel. 4. The review panel shall determine its own procedures, providing for the expeditious conduct of the hearing and assuring to the applicant or applicants full opportunity to be heard and to present its or their case. 5. The Executive Director shall act on behalf of the Commission and shall provide the review panel with sufficient information to enable it to understand the basis upon which the decision was made. 6. Any member of the Commission may submit a memorandum to the review panel concerning the matter under review and the panel shall allow any such member full opportunity to be heard. 7. Unless the review panel decides otherwise because of the partic ular circumstances of the case, the expenses of the review panel, including the remuneration of its members, shall be borne as follows: (a) 70 per cent shall be borne by the applicant or, if there is more than one applicant, divided equally among the applicants; and (b) 30 per cent shall be borne by the Commission from its annual budget. 8. Any decision of the review panel shall be taken by a majority of its members. 9. If the applicant or, where there is more than one applicant, any one of them, does not a ppear before the review panel, the panel may continue the proceedings and make its findings and recommendations. Absence of an applicant shall not constitute a bar to the review proceedings. 10. The findings and recommendations of the review panel shall b e confined to the subject matter of the application and state the reasons on which it is based. It shall contain the names of the members who have participated and the date of the finding. Any member of the panel may attach a separate or dissenting opinion to the finding. The review panel shall not, however, substitute its decision for that of the Commission. The panel shall communicate its findings and recommendations, including its reasons, to the applicant or applicants and the Executive Director within 30 days of the end of the hearing. The Executive Director shall circulate copies of the review panel’s findings and recommendations and reasons therefor to all members of the Commission.

ANNEX III. TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR FISHING Article 1 Introductory The operator of every fishing vessel authorized to be used for fishing in the Convention Area shall comply with the following terms and conditions at all times when the vessel is in the Convention Area. Such terms and conditions shall apply in addition to any terms and conditions which may apply to the vessel in areas under the national jurisdiction of a member of the Commission by reason of a licence issued by such member or pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral fisheries agreement. For the purposes of this Annex, “operator” means any person who is in charge of, directs or controls a fishing vessel, including the owner, master or charterer. Article 2 Compliance with national laws The operator of the vessel shall comply with the applicable national laws of each coastal State Party to this Convention in whose jurisdiction it enters and shall be responsible for the compliance by the vessel and its crew with such laws and the vessel shall be operated in accordance with such laws. Article 3 Obligations of the operator in respect of observers 1. The operator and each member of the crew shall allow and assist any person identified as an observer under the regional observer programme to: (a) embark at a place and time agreed to; (b) have full access to and u se of all facilities and equipment on board which the observer may determine is necessary to carry out his or her duties, including full access to the bridge, fish on board, and areas which may be used to hold, process, weigh and store fish, and full access to the vessel’s records including its logs and documentation for the purpose of records inspection and copying, reasonable access to navigational equipment, charts and radios, and reasonable access to other information relating to fishing; (c) remove samples; (d) disembark at an agreed place and time; and (e) carry out all duties safely. 2. The operator or any crew member shall not assault, obstruct, resist, delay, refuse boarding to, intimidate or interfere with observers in the performance of their duties. 3. The operator shall provide the observer, while on board the vessel, at no expense to the observer or the observer’s government, with food, accommodation and medical facilities of a reasonable standard equivalent to those normally available to an officer on board the vessel. Article 4 Regulation of transhipment 1. The operator shall comply with any procedures established by the Commission to verify the quantity and species transhipped, and any additional procedures and measures established by the Commission with respect to transhipment in the Convention Area. 2. The operator shall allow and assist any person authorized by the Commission or by the member of the Commission in whose designated port or area a transhipment takes place to have full access to and use of facilities and equipment which such authorized person may determine is necessary to carry out his or her duties, including full access to the bridge, fish on board and areas which may be used to hold, process, weigh and store fish, and full access to the vessel’s records, including its log and documentation for the purpose of inspection and photocopying. The operator shall also allow and assist any such authorized person to remove samples and gather any other information required to fully monitor the activity. The operator or any member of the crew shall not assault, obstruct, resist, delay, refuse boarding to, intimidate or interfere with any such authorized person in the performance of such person’s duties. Every effort should be made to ensure that any disruption to fishing operations is minimized during inspections of transhipments. Article 5 Reporting The operator shall record and report vessel position, catch of target and non-target species, fishing effort and other relevant fisheries data in accordance with the standards for collection of such data set out in Annex I of the Agreement. Article 6 Enforcement 1. The authorization issued by the flag State of the vessel and, if applicable, any licence issued by a coastal State Party to this Convention, or a duly certified copy, facsimile or telex confirmation thereof, shall be carried on board the vessel at all times and produced at the request of an authorized enforcement official of any member of the Commission. 2. The master and each member of the crew of the vessel shall immediately comply with every instruction and direction given by an authorized and identified officer of a member of the Commission, including to stop, to move to a safe location, and to facilitate safe boarding and inspection of the vessel, its licence, gear, equipment, records, facilities, fish and fish products. Such boarding and inspection shall be conducted as much as possible in a manner so as not to interfere unduly with the lawful operation of the vessel. The operator and each member of the crew shall facilitate and assist in any action by an authorized officer and shall not assault, obstruct, resist, delay, refuse boarding to, intimidate or interfere with an authorized officer in the performance of his or her duties. 3. The vessel shall be marked and identified in accordance with the FAO Standard Specifications for the Marking and Identification of Fishing Vessels or such alternative standard as may be adopted by the Commission. At all times when the vessel is in the Convention Area, all parts of such markings shall be clear, distinct and uncovered. 4. The operator shall ensure the continuous monitoring of the international distress and calling frequency 2182 khz (HF) or the international safety and calling frequency 156.8 Mhz (channel 16, VHF-FM) to facilitate communication with the fisheries management, surveillance and enforcement authorities of the members of the Commission. 5. The operator shall ensure that a recent and up to date copy of the International Code of Signals (INTERCO) is on board and accessible at all times. 6. At all times when the vessel is navigating through an area under the national jurisdiction of a member of the Commission in which it does not have a licence to fish, and at all times when the vessel is navigating on the high seas in the Convention Area and has not been authorized by its flag State to fish on the high seas, all fishing equipment on board the vessel shall be stowed or secured in such a manner that it is not readily available to be used for fishing.

ANNEX IV. INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS The following information shall be provided to the Commission in respect of each fishing vessel entered in the record required to be maintained under article 24, paragraph 4, of this Convention: 1. Name of fishing vessel, registration number, previous names (if known), and port of registry; 2. Name and address of owner or owners; 3. Name and nationality of master; 4. Previous flag (if any); 5. International Radio Call Sign; 6. Vessel communication types and numbers ( INMARSAT A, B and C numbers and satellite telephone number); 7. Colour photograph of vessel; 8. Where and when built; 9. Type of vessel; 10. Normal crew complement; 11. Type of fishing method or methods; 12. Length; 13. Moulded depth; 14. Beam; 15. Gross register tonnage; 16. Power of main engine or engines; 17. The nature of the authorization to fish granted by the flag State; 18. Carrying capacity, including freezer type, capacity and number and fish hold capacity.

– – – ANNEX 7

FINAL ACT OF THE MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Following the entry into force, on 16 November 1994, of the 19 82 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency, in December 1994, convened a multilateral high-level conference on South Pacific tuna fisheries. The broad objective of the conference was to promote responsible fishing operations for fishing vessels operating in the South Pacific region, particularly in the light of the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Subsequently, following the adoption, in 1995, of the United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, a second multilateral conference was convened in June 1997 in order to consider issues relating to the establishment of a regional mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. That conference agreed that further sessions of the conference should be convened with a view to the establishment of a regional mechanism for conservation and management of the highly migratory fish stocks of the Western and Central Pacific within an overall time-frame of three years from June 1997. 1

II. SESSIONS

2. The sessions of the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific were held as follows:

? First session held at Honiara, Solomon Islands, 1 to 5 December 1994; ? Second session held at Majuro, Marshall Islands, 10 to 13 June 1997; ? Third session held at Tokyo, Japan, 22 to 26 June 1998; ? Fourth session held at Honolulu, Hawaii, 10 to 19 February 1999; ? Fifth session held at Honolulu, Hawaii, 6 to 15 September 1999; ? Sixth session, held at Honolulu, Hawaii, 11 to 19 April 2000; ? Seventh session, held at Honolulu, Hawaii, 30 August to 5 September 2000.

3. In addition, the Conference mandated a number of technical co nsultations for the consideration of specific technical issues relevant to the work of the Conference. Such technical consultations were held as follows:

? Technical consultation on the collection and exchange of fisheries data, tuna research and stock assessment, held at Noumea, New Caledonia, 15 to 19 July 1996; ? Technical consultation on fishing vessel monitoring systems, held at Suva, Fiji, 13 to 15 November 1996; ? Intersessional technical consultation on issues relating to fisheries management held at Honiara, Solomon Islands, 1 to 5 December 1997; ? Intersessional technical consultation on issues relating to monitoring control and surveillance held at Suva, Fiji, 10 to 13 March 1998.

III. PARTICIPATION IN THE CONFERENCE

4. Participation in the first s ession of the Conference was by invitation of the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency, as convenor of the Conference. Subsequently, other States, territories and fishing entities with an interest in the highly migratory fish stocks in the region were invited to participate in the Conference, either as full participants, or as observers.

1 Majuro Declaration of 13 June 1997. States, territories and fishing entities that participated at sessions of the Conference

Australia, Canada, 2 China, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, French Polynesia, Indonesia, 3 Japan, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Chinese Taipei, Tonga, Tuvalu, United States of America, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, on behalf of Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands, 4 Vanuatu, Wallis and Futuna.

Observers that participated at sessions of the Conference

States and entities Canada (second and third sessions) Ecuador (sixth and subsequent sessions) European Commission (fourth and subsequent sessions) Mexico (fifth and subsequent sessions) United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, on behalf of Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands (fifth session)

Intergovernmental organizations and South Pacific regional organizations

Asian Development Bank Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Forum Secretariat Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission OLDEPESCA Pacific Community South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency South Pacific Regional Environment Programme University of the South Pacific Western Pacific Fisheries Consultative Committee.

IV. OFFICERS

5. At the first session, the Conference elected Mr Robin Yarrow (Fiji) as its Chairman. At the second session, Mr Satya N. Nandan (Fiji) was elected as the Chairman of the Conference. Mr Michael W. Lodge served as Secretary of the Conference. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, provided an officer, Mr Blaise Kuemlangan, to serve as technical adviser to the Conference.

V. MAIN DOCUMENTS OF THE CONFERENCE

6. The following is a list of the main documents and r esolutions issued during the Conference. In addition to these documents, official accounts of the work of the Conference may be found in the statements of the Chairman issued at the end of each session and published in the reports of the Conference. 5 Additional information on the issues considered by the Conference may be found in the information notes issued by the Chairman prior to each session.6

2 Admitted as a participant at the fourth session. 3 Indonesia participated from the third session. 4 Admitted as a participant at the sixth session. 5 An official report was issued by the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency after each session of the Conference. 6 The information notes are included in the reports of the Conference. ? Majuro Declaration of 13 June 1997 ? MHLC/WP.1 (22 June 1998) Draft Articles for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? MHLC/WP.1/Rev.1 (26 June 1998) Revised Draft Articles for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? MHLC/WP.1/Rev.2 (19 February 1999) Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? MHLC/WP.2 (20 July 1999) Draft Preamble and Final Clauses for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? MHLC/WP.1/Rev.3 (9 September 1999) Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? MHLC/WP.1/Rev.4 (16 September 1999) Revised Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific, Prepared by the Chairman. ? Resolution of 19 February 1999, relating to the exercise of restraint in the expansion of fishing effort. ? Resolution of 15 September 1999, relating to future participation in the Conference. ? MHLC/Draft Convention (17 April 2000). ? MHLC/WP.3/Rev.1 (19 April 2000) Draft resolution relating to the establishment of a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific. ? MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.1 (19 April 2000). ? MHLC/WP.3/Rev.2 (19 April 2000) Draft resolution relating to the establishment of a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific. ? MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.2 (2 September 2000).

VI. WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

7. The first session of the Conference was convened at Honiara, Solomon Islands, in December 1994. The work of the session consisted of a general debate on issues relating to the establishment of a regional mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. The topics of discussion at the first session included the status of highly migratory fish stocks in the region, collection and exchange of catch data, transhipment, transponder technology and enforcement. Participants in the first session reached a common understanding on the need for sustainable development of the tuna resources of the western and central Pacific Ocean, the importance of responsible fishing and the need for effective cooperation between coastal States and distant water fishing nations in the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the region.

8. Following the first session of the Conference two technical consultations took place. A technical consultation on the collection and exchange of fisheries data took place at Noumea, New Caledonia, from 15 to 19 July 1996. A technical consultation on a regional vessel monitoring system took place at Suva, Fiji, from 13 to 15 November 1996.

9. The second session of the Conference was convened at Majuro, Marshall Islands, in June 1997, following the adoption of the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement, in order to consider issues relating to the establishment of a regional mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. At the end of the second session, the Conference adopted the Majuro Declaration in which participants in the Conference declared, amongst other things, their commitment to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean in accordance with the 1982 Convention and the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement within an overall time-frame of three years from June 1997.

10. Also at the second session, the Conference mandated two intersessional technical consultations on issues relating to fisheries management and on issues relating to monitoring, control and surveillance. The intersessional technical consultation on issues relating to fisheries management was held at Honiara, Solomon Islands, from 1 to 5 December 1997. Mr Albert S. Wata (Solomon Islands) served as chairman of the technical consultation. The intersessional technical consultation on issues relating to monitoring control and surveillance was held at Suva, Fiji Islands, from 10 to 13 March 1998. Mr Grant Bryden (New Zealand) served as chairman of the technical consultation. 11. At the third session, the Chairman tabl ed a working paper containing draft articles for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.1). At the end of the third session, the Chairman issued a revised version of his working paper (MHLC/WP.1/Rev.1).

12. At the fourth session, the Conference continued its consideration of the Chairman’s revised draft articles. At the end of the fourth session, the Chairman prepared a new revision of the draft articles in the form of a negotiating text, entitled “Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean” (MHLC/WP.1/Rev.2). The Conference also adopted a resolution relating to the exercise of restraint in the expansion of future fishing effort. In July 1999, prior to the fifth session of the Conference, the Chairman issued a further working paper containing a draft Preamble and Final Clauses for a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.2).

13. At the fifth session, the Conference considered further the negotiating texts prepared by the Chairman (MHLC/WP.1/Rev.2 and MHLC/WP.2). In the light of the discussions, the Chairman introduced a further revision of the negotiating text under symbol MHLC/WP.1/Rev.3. The Conference considered the revised negotiating text prepared by the Chairman and, at the end of the fifth session, in the light of the discussions, the Chairman issued a further revision of the negotiating text under symbol MHLC/WP.1/Rev.4 entitled Revised Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Also at the fifth session, the Conference adopted a resolution relating to future participation in the Conference.

14. At the sixth session, the Conference considered the revised text of the Draft Convention (MHLC/WP.1/Rev.4). At the beginning of the sixth session, the Conference established two informal groups to consider and report on issues relating to financial and budgetary matters and the observer programme. Mr Grant Bryden (New Zealand) and Mr Feleti Teo (Tuvalu) served as chairmen of the informal groups. Following consideration of specific issues in informal groups, the Chairman issued on 17 April 2000 a proposal for consideration by the Conference entitled “Draft Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean” (MHLC/Draft Convention).

15. Prior to the sixth session, the Chairman issued a working paper containing a draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.3). The Conference considered the draft resolution at the sixth session and, in the light of the discussions, the Chairman issued a revised version of the draft resolution under symbol MHLC/WP.3/Rev.1. At the end of the sixth session the Chairman issued a further revised text of his proposal (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.1) and a further revised text of a draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (MHLC/WP.3/Rev.2).

16. The seventh session had been declared as the final decision-making session of the Conference. Following deliberations on key outstanding issues, the Chairman issued on 2 September 2000, for consideration by the Conference, a revised text of the “Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.” (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.2). In the light of concerns raised by some delegations, the Chairman continued to hold informal consultations on outstanding issues in relation to the revised text and re-issued the text of the Draft Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.” (MHLC/Draft Convention/Rev.2*).

17. On 4 September 2000, the Chairman informed the Conference that all efforts at reaching general agreement had been exhausted. On the same date, the Chairman formally presented to the Conference the text of the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean as well as the draft resolution establishing a Preparatory Conference for the establishment of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. The Convention, together with the resolution, was adopted on 4 September 2000 by a vote. 7 On the same date, the Conference also adopted a resolution expressing gratitude to the Governments of Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Japan and United States of America for hosting the sessions of the Conference. The resolutions adopted by the Conference are annexed to this Final Act.

18. The Conference decided to resume its seventh session on 5 September 2000 for a ceremony of signature of the Convention and this Final Act.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned representatives of the States, territories and fishing entities which participated in the Conference have signed this Final Act.

DONE at Honolulu this fifth day of September, two thousand, in a single original. The original of this Final Act shall be deposited in the archives of the Government of New Zealand.

The Chairman of the Conference: Satya N. NANDAN

The Secretary of the Conference: Michael W. LODGE

Representatives of the following States signed the Final Act: Australia, Canada, Cook Islands, China, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Fiji Islands, France, Indonesia, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Republic of Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Republic of Palau, The Independent State of Papua New Guinea, Republic of the Philippines, Republic of Korea, 8 The Independent State of Samoa, Solomon Islands, Kingdom of Tonga, Tuvalu, United States of America and Republic of Vanuatu. The Final Act was also signed by representatives of New Caledonia and Chinese Taipei.

7 The result of the vote was 19 in favour, 2 against (Japan and Republic of Korea), with three abstentions (China, France and Tonga). Prior to the vote, Japan expressed its reservation with respect to the acceptance by the Conference of the credentials of the delegation of Indonesia. 8 In signing the Final Act, the Republic of Korea noted its objection to resolution I. Annex

RESOLUTION I

ESTABLISHING A PREPARATORY CONFERENCE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS IN THE WESTERN AND CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN

The Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of the Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, Having adopted the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (“the Convention”) which provides for the establishment of the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, Having agreed on the desirability of early entry into force of the Convention, Having decided to make the necessary arrangements for the commencement of the functions of the Commission without undue delay and to take all possible measures to ensure its effective operation, Having decided to establish a Preparatory Conference for the fulfillment of these purposes, Recalling its resolution of 15 September 1999, in which participants decided, inter alia, that requests for participation in the Conference would not be entertained until the Convention enters into force, Decides as follows:

1. The Preparatory Conference shall be open to participation by the States r eferred to in article 34 of the Convention and by the fishing entity referred to in article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The territories referred to in article 43 of the Convention may participate in the same manner as they participated in the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of the Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (“the Conference”). Other States and entities that participated as observers in the Conference may participate in the Preparatory Conference as observers but shall not be entitled to participate in the taking of decisions.

2. The Preparatory Conference will be convened by the depositary of the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean and the first session of the Conference shall take place no sooner than 180 days and no later than 240 days after the Convention is opened for signature.

3. The Preparatory Conference will elect its Chairman and other officers.

4. The Preparatory Conference will adopt its rules of procedure which shall require decisions on matters of substance to be taken by a three-fourths majority of those present and voting and decisions on questions of procedure to be taken by a majority of those present and voting.

5. The Preparatory Conference may provide for an interim secretariat to support its work.

6. The Preparatory Conference will: (a) prepare draft rules of procedure of the Commission; (b) prepare draft rules, regulations and procedures, as necessary, to enable the Commission to commence its functions, including draft regulations concerning the financial management and internal administration of the Commission; (c) prepare the provisional agenda for the first m eeting of the Commission and, as appropriate, make recommendations relating to items thereon; (d) make recommendations concerning the Secretariat of the Commission in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention; (e) make recommendations conce rning the establishment of the headquarters of the Commission; and (f) make recommendations concerning the budget for the first financial period of the Commission, including recommendations for a scheme for contributions to the budget in accordance with article 18, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

7. The Preparatory Conference will also endeavour to: (a) formulate recommendations for consideration by the Commission concerning: (i) the implementation of articles 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Convention; (ii) the collection of data and information in accordance with article 23, paragraph 2 (a) and (b), of the Convention; (iii) the establishment of a record of fishing vessels in accordance with article 24, paragraph 7, of the Convention; (iv) the implementation of a rticle 24, paragraphs 8, 9 and 10, of the Convention; (v) the implementation of article 30, paragraph 3, of the Convention; (b) make recommendations concerning the relationship between the Commission and existing regional institutions concerned with conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks; and (c) carry out such other functions as the Conference may decide.

8. The Preparatory Conference will meet as often as necessary for the expeditious exercise of its functions. It will remain in existence until the conclusion of the first meeting of the Commission, at which time its property and records shall be transferred to the Commission.

9. The Preparatory Conference will prepare a final report on all matters within its mandate for presentation to the Commission at its first session.

10. The Preparatory Conference will seek provisional scientific advice on the status of skipjack, yellowfin and bigeye tuna stocks and the South Pacific albacore stock and may, if it considers necessary, recommend such conservation and management measures, including provisional harvest level, as may be necessary pending the entry into force of the Convention to ensure the long-term sustainability of stocks within the Convention Area. Any conservation and management measures recommended by the Conference will be applied on a voluntary basis.

11. The Preparatory Conference may make use, as appropriate, of existing regional institutions and outside sources of expertise to facilitate its work. In particular, it may obtain scientific advice from the Standing Committee on Tuna and Billfish.

12. The costs of the Preparatory Conference, including secretariat costs, will be met by the participants through voluntary contributions in such manner as may be agreed, taking into account, where appropriate, the need to obtain national appropriations as well as the need to minimize the costs to all participants. RESOLUTION II

EXPRESSING GRATITUDE TO THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE SOLOMON ISLANDS, THE REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS, JAPAN AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of the Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, Recalling that its first session was held at Honiara, Solomon Islands, Further recalling that its second session, at which the Majuro Declaration of 13 June 1997 was adopted, was held at Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Recalling further that its third session was held at the invitation of the Government of Japan in Tokyo, Japan, Bearing in mind that its fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh sessions, as well as the ceremony of signature of the Convention and Final Act, were held in Honolulu, Hawaii, Acknowledging the underlying spirit of unity and cooperation in which the Conference has conducted its business throughout, which reflects the culture and ideals of the peoples of the Pacific region, Decides 1. To express to the Governments of the Solomon Islands, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Japan and the United States of America its gratitude for hosting the sessions of the Conference, 2. To express its sincere gratitude to all those who contributed generously to the Conference by providing financial support, 3. To express to the authorities of the State of Hawaii an d, in particular, to the organizers of the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh sessions of the Conference, and the ceremony of signature of the Convention and the Final Act, its deepest gratitude for the exceptional and unforgettable hospitality accorded to all participants.

– – – ANNEX 8

CLOSING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRMAN, AMBASSADOR SATYA N. NANDAN, TO THE SEVENTH SESSION OF THE MULTILATERAL HIGH-LEVEL CONFERENCE

5 September 2000

Honourable Ministers, distinguished delegates, friends and colleagues,

We have come to the end of a very long road, which for most of the Pacific island countries began in 1977 at the South Pacific Forum meeting in Port Moresby. At that time, recognizing the developments taking place at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and in particular the provisions of the draft convention at that time relating to highly migratory species, decided that there was a need for an international body for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks whose membership should include all coastal States of the South Pacific region as well as foreign nations fishing in the region. While it was not opportune to negotiate such a regional arrangement at that time, mainly because some distant water fishing nations did not recognize the jurisdiction of coastal States over highly migratory species in their exclusive economic zones, the Forum countries did proceed to establish their own regional agency, the Forum Fisheries Agency, in order to coordinate and harmonize the policies of the region with a view to establishing a regional management organization at a later date.

The genesis of the present initiative to establish a conservation and management regime for highly migratory fish stocks therefore goes back to that seminal decision of the Heads of Government of Forum countries in 1977. Even before the Law of the Sea Convention was adopted in 1982, the leaders of this region showed the wisdom and foresight to recognize that the resources of the ocean in the region must be conserved and managed sustainably. They were concerned at the rapid increase in the fishing activities in the region of a growing number of fishing nations.

In dealing with the island States of this region, it has to be recognized that they have certain special characteristics. They are small with limited land resources but large maritime jurisdictions. A substantial portion of the highly migratory fish stocks are found within areas under their national jurisdiction. These areas of national jurisdiction abut each other, forming a large aggregation of interlocking jurisdictions. While the Pacific island States acknowledged the need for a regional regime for conservation and management, they hesitated to rush into arrangements with major fishing nations whose capacity and capability seemed overwhelming.

It was therefore with great trepidation that in 1994 the Forum Fisheries Agency took the initiative and mustered enough courage to convene an exploratory meeting with distant water fishing nations. Even after the Majuro Declaration when they finally agreed to begin the negotiations for a regional treaty, they were not convinced that their interests would be reasonably protected against the more powerful and economically superior powers they would face. As a result it took considerable effort to overcome this barrier to negotiation and enter into a dialogue to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks of the region.

It is important to recount this history in order to emphasize that in dealing with this region account has to be taken of the feelings and vulnerability of some of the world’s smallest States when they enter into a cooperative arrangement, of the kind reflected in the Convention just adopted, with some of the largest and most powerful countries. It would be insensitive to disregard or ignore this reality; equally it would be insensitive to try and impose on this group of countries a regime which would further add to their sense of vulnerability. It goes without saying, therefore, that one cannot apply the standards of other regions here.

In establishing a regional arrangement for this region it has therefore been necessary to be vitally aware of this fact and to develop a regional regime with which all Parties would feel reasonably secure. Arguments by the rich and powerful that somehow they are being disadvantaged because they cannot have unfettered access or a procedural trump card over the regional arrangement ignores the need for special consideration in dealing with the special characteristics of the region. What has been achieved in this Convention, however, reflects a fair balance of interests, even though for many countries this has meant stretching their limits to the utmost. There are two further facts about this region that must be recognized. First, the region has, for over two decades, in the interests of proper conservation and management, been making tremendous efforts to harmonize its fisheries management policies. Secondly, it has already entered into multilateral treaty arrangements to regulate the fleets of certain fishing nations. That treaty establishes standards for monitoring, control and surveillance both in exclusive economic zones and in adjacent high seas areas. The procedures and practices established under that treaty have been implemented in good faith and have worked well for many years, resulting in enhanced cooperation between the parties. It is apparent that the countries of the region do not wish to derogate from these standards and any new agreement must therefore be consistent with such standards. It must be recognized that in any negotiation these two factors weigh heavily in the minds of Pacific countries.

These facts form the background for the negotiations that we have just completed. In addition, there have been important developments in fisheries management practices in recent times. It is no longer acceptable to base new regimes for conservation and management on precedents from other fisheries management organizations, most of which pre-date UNCED, Agenda 21 and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement, let alone the 1982 Convention. The world has moved on. Any new arrangement must reflect the reality of international fisheries. Although the UN Fish Stocks Agreement has not yet entered into force, it will do so in the not too distant future. It has already become the reference point for the review of fisheries management organizations worldwide.

There is an international obligation to put in place comprehensive and effective arrangements for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks where no such arrangement exists. Tuna stocks in this region are generally in a robust and healthy state at present. This situation contrasts sharply with similar stocks in other areas of the world. We must ensure that long term sustainable measures are put in place in this region as a means of maintaining the tuna stocks in a healthy state and, as appropriate, enhancing their status. We have the possibility of staying ahead of the curve and we are morally obliged to do so.

The Convention agreed for the western and central Pacific Ocean is forward-looking, consistent with international law, and reflects the evolution in the principles for fisheries management. It sets out the norms and principles on which conservation and management measures for sound and sustainable use must be established. While recognizing that these valuable resources must be exploited as a valuable source of food it also introduces the principle of precautionary approaches to management for their long term sustainability. It is important, in this regard, to clarify that the Convention applies to the waters of the Pacific Ocean. It is not intended to include waters in South-East Asia which are not part of the Pacific Ocean; nor is it intended to include the waters of the South China Sea.

The main thrust of this Convention is that if there is proper conservation and management, both coastal States and fishing nations will benefit from these valuable resources now and for generations to come. To further this objective, the Convention establishes a Commission for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. The Convention elaborates on the responsibilities of the Commission and its vital role in ensuring the sustainability of the highly migratory fish stocks of the region as a whole. It provides for a balance in decision making and ensures that fishing nations and coastal States are both involved in taking decisions on matters relating to conservation and management. It contains an important safeguard for members of the Forum Fisheries Agency and for non-members in the fact that no decision can be taken without the involvement of all interests.

A fundamental precept in the regime is that there is provison for compulsory and binding dispute settlement arising from disputes over the interpretation and application of the Convention. These procedures are based on the widely accepted norms contained in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is the paramount instrument governing all ocean-related activities. The wide acceptance of those procedures was recognized by their inclusion in the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and they are now incorporated in this Convention.

Every Convention must reflect a balance of interests. The evaluation of whether this Convention reflects that balance is not easy because each delegation has a different perspective. It is easy to say that one’s interests are not reflected in specific areas while ignoring the fact that, in other areas, important concessions have been made and compromises agreed. In a multilateral arrangement of this kind no participant can expect one hundred percent satisfaction. There are occasions when the minimum requirement of one side is anathema to another side; what is important, however, is to evaluate the result as a whole and not isolate areas of specific interest. Over the past five years of negotiation we have identified the major issues and dealt with them progressively in successive revised texts. The difficulty has been with those proposals which attempted to move away from the accepted international norm as reflected in the 1982 Convention and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. Those documents served as the basis for our negotiations, as agreed in the Majuro Declaration. To say that the Convention just adopted is flawed because it is consistent with those basic instruments is to ignore the internationally agreed framework under which we have all worked. I hope that, on reflection, this will be recognized so that we can all return to the spirit of cooperation which characterized most of our negotiations.

Distinguished delegates,

I wish to recall the way in which our negotiations proceeded. In each session we prepared lists of issues and each issue was debated and negotiated sequentially, according to its level of difficulty. On some issues, it was difficult to achieve any agreement and it was necessary to return to these issues for further discussion. Every opportunity was given to all participants to raise any issue or question. When we left here at the end of our sixth session, we had a text which was largely agreed to by all, except for a few outstanding difficult issues. Before we came to this final session we identified three key issues that needed further consideration. These were the issue of decision-making in the Commission, the issue of the participation of fishing entities, and the issue of participation by territories. This, of course, did not preclude us from addressing other issues that might be raised.

We had also agreed that this was to be the concluding session at which we would complete our negotiations and adopt the Convention. Intersessionally, considerable effort was made by the Chairman with the help of other delegations to prepare the ground for this final negotiation. However, when we arrived at this session, we found that the issues we were confronted with were much more than we had anticipated. In particular, the delegation of Japan proposed a number of substantial changes to the draft Convention. Some of them would have been a radical departure from the discussions over the past five years, while others were matters which had already been considered during the negotiations and which were not acceptable to the Conference as a whole.

While opportunity was given to the delegation of Japan to explain its new proposals, it was very clear from the reactions of others and the history of the negotiations that the major proposals would not be widely accepted. The unfortunate aspect of this development was that the Japanese delegation was completely new and not familiar with the history of the negotiations over the past five years. This created an added problem in the dialogue and communication. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Japanese delegation feels dissatisfied with the results.

Given these developments, consideration had to be given to postponing this final session. However, consultations with a broad spectrum of participants revealed that, apart from one other delegation, there was no desire to postpone the Conference further. Most indicated that the issues raised had either already been considered and rejected, or were radical departures from accepted practice which they were not willing to accept in any case. They considered that a postponement of the Conference would not serve any useful purpose since there was no likelihood of any agreement to those proposals. In the circumstances, given the programme established by the Conference, the Chairman had no option but to proceed with that programme. In this regard, all delegations are present in this room and can speak for themselves.

Distinguished delegates,

By adopting the Convention we have taken an historic step forward towards the conservation and proper management of the fish resources of this vast Pacific Ocean. If properly applied and administered, the result of this Convention would serve not only the present generation but generations to come. That is the responsibility we all share whether we are coastal States or fishing nations. If we do not commit ourselves to this cause then we will all suffer the consequences, which would be more severe for the small island States in the region.

Distinguished delegates,

It remains for me to thank each and every one of you for your cooperation towards the achievement of our goal. I especially wish to thank the Honourable Ministers who have come to this session to reinforce the commitment of their governments to the Convention. I would also like to take the opportunity, once again, to thank the governments of Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Japan and the United States for hosting the various sessions of the Conference. On behalf of us all, I wish to express particular appreciation to the work of Kitty Simonds and all the staff of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council for their exceptional hospitality and formidable organizational skills over the past four sessions.

– – – ANNEX 9

STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS AND OBSERVERS UPON THE ADOPTION OF THE CONVENTION

Australia (on behalf of the Forum Fisheries Committee)

It is again my privilege, as Chair of the Forum Fisheries Committee, to deliver the following statement on behalf of the 16 member countries of the Forum Fisheries Agency. Let me reiterate our thanks to the United States Government, the Government of Hawaii and the Western Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Council for the excellent meeting arrangements and the warm hospitality we have enjoyed.

Thank you also, Mr. Chairman, for the important statement just delivered setting out setting out the MHLC process and the challenging issues of different kinds with which we have collectively had to deal.

This is a historic occasion, not just for FFA member countries, but for the management of the tuna fisheries in the western and central Pacific. The Convention we adopted yesterday is the first comprehensive regional fisheries Convention to build on the principles set out in the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement. It is the culmination of years of hard work by both coastal States and their fishing partners searching for agreement on how this important fishery can be sustainably and responsibly managed.

This Convention is of fundamental importance to FFA member countries, because the bulk of the catch is taken in their EEZs, because it is the major source of economic development for many island countries, and because they wish to exercise their responsibilities for the benefit of their current and future generations.

The FFA Convention which established the FFA over 20 years ago recognised that international machinery is required to manage the fisheries of the region, in addition to measures taken by FFA member countries in their areas of national jurisdiction. The support of the FFA for the adoption of this Convention honours that commitment.

Mr. Chairman, FFA member countries are proud of their long and unwavering support for the process that has brought us together today. It was the FFA member countries that initiated the MHLC process in 1994 and we have always sought the cooperation and constructive participation of the fishing partners in developing this process consistent with the principles and objectives of LOSC and the Fish Stocks Agreement.

Despite the pride FFA member countries have in this achievement, they have mixed feelings about the end result. The Convention text is broadly acceptable to FFA member countries but because of the many concessions they had to make in the effort to find consensus, it falls well short of their ideal outcome. I wish to make it clear that FFA member countries will be striving to ensure that the work in the Preparatory Conference and the Commission does not fall short of the high standards for conservation and management of fisheries that are fundamental to the future of the stocks and of our people who depend on them. Once the Convention enters into force, it will impose binding obligations under international law on all those party to the Convention in matters relating to conservation and management, including their dealings with non parties, and FFA member countries will act consistently and unitedly in the latter respect.

This process has been one of compromise for all, where there should be no winners or losers. The FFA member countries urge all to accept this outcome that broadly reflects the principles espoused in the Majuro Declaration. They look forward to the full participation of all in the work that lies ahead, hoping and expecting that all participants approach this in good faith. The FFA member countries therefore call on all participants to sign and ratify this Convention as soon as possible.

Mr. Chairman, the FFA member countries reiterate their strongly held view that the seat of the Commission should be located within the FFA region, where the tuna resources of the western and central Pacific, which are central to their development aspirations, are found. They look forward to the support of others towards this end. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I wish to express the deep gratitude of the FFA member countries to you, and your secretariat, for your unstinting, and in our view, heroic efforts to bring to fruition a Convention that fairly reflects the varied aspirations of all participants. This is a truly remarkable achievement that deserves wide acclaim for ushering in a new era in international fisheries management. We are, after all, essentially at a beginning, more than an end, of a tremendously important endeavour. We thank you profoundly for helping us to reach this first key step.

-----

Australia

Thank you for giving me the floor for a second time. I spoke earlier on behalf of the 16 members of the FFA, in my capacity as Chair of the Forum Fisheries Committee. Australia fully supports everything expressed in that statement; however, I would like to make a few additional remarks in my capacity as head of the Australian delegation.

Australia shares the sense of accomplishment mixed with disappointment expressed by yourself and by participants yesterday and today. This Convention should have been stronger and, with a longer term view by some participants, it could have been. We are all committed to developing our fisheries, but rationally, sustainably and collectively – not, as some would prefer, unilaterally, through minimisation of regulation and avoidance of responsibility.

This Convention is established on the foundations of UNCLOS and UNFSA. It elaborates the obligations in those instruments, and, for the first time, applies them to a particular region – the world’s last great fishery. As a State which has ratified the Agreement, Australia considers it fundamental that this be done accurately and consistently. We have largely met that objective, and we are confident that Australian signature of the text of this Convention will follow speedily once the necessary domestic treaty processes have been completed.

A key UNCLOS obligation, elaborated in UNFSA, is for coastal and fishing States and entities to cooperate in the conservation of highly migratory fish stocks throughout their range. We regret that some participants have not approached this final session willing to work with the rest of us to fulfil that obligation. There nevertheless remains an obligation under international law for all of us to cooperate.

This of course includes all waters under national jurisdiction in the Convention Area - including EEZs and archipelagic waters - as well as the high seas.

Decision-making has been a difficult issue. Australia has sought to ensure that the mistakes of past fisheries regimes were not repeated, and that participants which, like Australia, are parties to UNFSA could meet their obligation to establish effective decision-making. We are disappointed that coastal States had to give so much ground to fishing States and entities, and that despite a final gesture of good will which meant the significant dilution of coastal State voting power, some participants were still not able to accept a formulation which greatly favours them. Still, Australia believes that if all participants cooperate and approach difficult issues collectively and with an understanding of the position of others, this decision-making formula can be made to work.

A related issue is that of dispute resolution. The international community advanced international law significantly with the conclusion of UNCLOS in 1982 and its entry into force in 1994, by establishing a system of compulsory dispute resolution. UNFSA strengthened it. Australia could not accept any step backwards from this system, which ensures that all participants are accountable for their international commitments. We are pleased that the Convention respects this fundamental principle.

Much work has been done, but much also remains to be done. The work of the Preparatory Conference will be crucial to ensuring that the text before us is translated into an effective regime in practice. All MHLC participants are entitled to become participants in the Preparatory Conference. We would urge all to do so, in a spirit of cooperation. In that spirit, Australia has been a substantial financial supporter of the MHLC process. We intend to demonstrate our continued commitment to this process by providing a significant financial contribution to the work of the Preparatory Conference. We call on other participants to make a similar commitment, to the extent of their respective financial capacities.

Mr. Chairman, may we conclude by expressing our gratitude for the Herculean efforts of you and your staff over 4 years in making this a reality. You have made great personal sacrifices, but have succeeded where others might have failed. Yours has been an unenviable task, but you have listened to everyone, done your utmost to bring us together, and delivered a fair and balanced result. We commend you and we thank you.

-----

Canada

Mr. Chairman, we would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you for the wise leadership that allowed us to complete our negotiations on schedule. The text that we have adopted accommodates the interest of the vast majority of conference participants and, most importantly, provides a framework within which we can conserve and manage highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific ocean for the benefit of all fishermen, both today and for generations to come – a fully sustainable fishery. We regret that some participants feel that their concerns have not been met.

The Convention we are adopting builds on UNCLOS and the 1995 UN Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. It implements those treaties in the central and western Pacific ocean for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks, and the Convention’s parentage should continue to be fully reflected as it is put into operation.

Mr. Chairman, we would be remiss if we did not recognize the spirit of compromise that nearly all delegations demonstrated as the negotiations progressed. Delegations showed flexibility so that the fundamental interests of others could be met. In this regard, I note that we desisted from our efforts to extend the Convention Area east of 150 degrees, an issue of great importance to Canada, as it would have provided for a more effective conservation and management regime for the northern albacore stock.

We hope that our collective interest in a sustainable fishery and this spirit of compromise will continue as we go home and submit the Convention to our respective authorities for consideration. For our part, my delegation considers this to be a strong text and we intend to recommend signature. We look forward to its early entry into force.

In the meantime, we will participate actively in the Preparatory Conference with a view to laying the groundwork for the Commission. We consider that the Preparatory Conference will also need to oversee stocks and fisheries in the Convention Area pending the establishment of the Commission.

In this regard, it is unclear in the Convention where the science for northern species, in particular northern albacore, will take place. Without a thorough assessment of the status of these stocks, the impact of increased fishing pressure cannot be measured and potential threats to these stocks could go unnoticed and uncorrected. This is a concern to Canada. We feel that it is a priority for the Preparatory Conference to address where the science for northern species will be done, and how this work will be integrated into the Science Committee under the Convention.

Finally, I take this opportunity to thank our American hosts, in particular Kitty Simonds and her staff at the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, as well as the staff from the MHLC Secretariat. Hawaii has proven an excellent venue and our work has been greatly facilitated by the excellent services available and the warm hospitality provided.

-----

China

The delegation of China would like to start by congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, and the Conference for the adoption of the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific. I highly appreciate your efforts in bringing the negotiation to its conclusion. Without your dedication, your patience and the tireless hard work, the finalization of the Convention would not have been possible. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Lodge and other staff from the Conference Secretariat for their hard and efficient work. At this juncture of the closure of the Conference, my delegation would like to share with you and all participants the following views.

China is a developing country but has the largest fishery catch and fishing capacity in the world. With the development of the economy and the improving of living standards in China, its fishing activities will have to be extended. China has great interest in extending fishery cooperation with all countries in the world and particularly with countries in our Pacific region. China has participated in a number of international fishery organizations, including such regional tuna fishery management organizations as the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), in a positive and constructive manner. Being a fishing State, China has hundreds of fishing vessels operating in the western and central Pacific. China supports the establishment of an effective regional fisheries management regime to conserve and manage the highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific. Therefore, China has participated in the MHLC from the beginning. China has done its best to promote the negotiation of the Convention and has made a substantive contribution to the process, both technically and financially. In order to assist the Conference to achieve the final conclusion of the negotiation, the delegation of China made a great number of substantive compromises on such issues as the Convention Area, boarding and inspection, decision-making, regional observer program, and the participation of fishing entities in particular. However, my delegation is not satisfied with the result of the negotiation and has difficulty in accepting some formulations of the Convention. Yesterday, in my statement on the explanation of vote, I referred to the dissatisfaction of my delegation with three issues, including the issue of Convention Area, the issue of boarding and inspection and the issue of fishing entities in particular.

Mr. Chairman, the issue of fishing entities has been of special concern to my delegation. In finding a solution to the issue, you have exerted enduring efforts by staying long hours and talking with different delegations. Though the solution to the issue in the Convention is not satisfactory to my delegation, I would like to say that I appreciate your efforts. As the Chair, you may not have the support from my delegation for all your proposals; but as a good friend, you have the trust and support from my delegation for life and forever.

On the issue of fishing entities, it has been quite clear that, in other fishery management organizations, fishing entities have been participating in the work of the relevant organizations in the capacity of observer without voting rights. During the negotiation of the current Convention, taking into account the activities of the fishing entity in the Convention Area and the concerns of Pacific island developing countries in the region, the delegation of China has tried to assist the Chair in finding the solution and has shown all the flexibilities by offering the arrangement for fishing entities to participate in the work of the Commission with voting rights on conservation and management measures in the Convention Area. However, in the process of negotiation, some delegations misused the flexibility of my delegation by trying to raise the status of fishing entities. My delegation would like to reiterate that the Commission established by the Convention is an inter-governmental body; fishing entities can participate in the work of the Commission as fishing entities but cannot have the status of membership. My delegation rejects any attempt to raise the status of fishing entities for political purposes.

Mr. Chairman, fishing on the high seas has been regulated by the Law of Sea Convention, UNIA and other relevant treaties. The current Convention would be an important treaty to regulate the fishing in the western and central Pacific, but my delegation has difficulty in accepting it due to some formulations. Until we accept the Convention, fishing vessels of China will continue to operate on the high seas in the western and central Pacific in accordance with relevant rules of international law and under the regulation of the Chinese Government. In addition, China will continue to extend the friendly fishery cooperation with Pacific Island developing countries concerned through bilateral channels on the basis of mutual benefits.

----- Cook Islands (Hon. Dr. Robert Woonton, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Marine Resources)

The great Pacific Ocean has been our home for centuries. It has defined our way of life. At heart we are voyagers born with the seed for adventure, willing to seek new frontiers.

With the signing of this Convention, we begin the journey towards truly multinational management and conservation of Pacific tunas. No doubt there are tremendous uncertainties about how things will pan out but we have hopes that good faith and cooperation will be at the heart of decisions made by all participating members.

We look forward to working with our Pacific Island brothers and distant water fishing nations alike, to develop ways in which tuna exploitation and conservation can benefit all. Our interest is on one hand to develop our own capacity to harvest and process tuna and on the other, to ensure that exploitation is conducted in a sustainable manner.

As a Pacific people, we have a great responsibility: to ensure that the last great world fishery remains healthy and is able to continue to provide nutrition to the international community. We look to the industrial fishing powers to work with us in achieving this goal.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we have worked hard over the last few years to develop a text that is acceptable. With our differing interests, demands have probably outweighed concessions and it has been your job, Mr. Chairman to be innovative and find the middle ground. We deeply appreciate your leadership, commitment and level-headedness and over these last few days we have been fortunate that you also possess a very deep well of humour. This is an historic moment and I salute you sir along with Mike Lodge and the secretariat.

-----

Federated States of Micronesia

As we reach the conclusion of many years of hard work on this vital Convention, I would like to pay special tribute to all of you who have made that possible, particularly the Chairman himself. No one knows better than all of you how difficult these past five years of negotiations have been, particularly the Chairman, who has carried the heaviest burden of always trying to find common grounds in the difficult and often varying views and interests. Mr. Chairman, you have skillfully guided the Conference to this happy conclusion. I am therefore very pleased to represent my Government in thanking you, Ambassador Nandan, very sincerely, for your tireless efforts, patience, and wisdom, throughout these negotiations. I also wish to thank your capable staff, who, like yourself, have worked long hours with unceasing dedication to their task.

Secondly, Mr. Chairman, to comment on the final outcomes of all this hard work, I would like to say that the document before us does not address all of the issues that our delegation had hoped to include in the Convention. We are, however, realistic and do acknowledge that the final text is the product of a negotiation process and so, my delegation fully accepts and supports it. My delegation also supports those comments the distinguished Chairman of the FFC from Australia has eloquently articulated. Having achieved this much, we should now move ahead with greater resolve and commitment to implementing the Convention. With even more difficult challenges ahead, the future will no doubt require that and a higher level of cooperation from everyone. Mr. Chairman, the Federated States of Micronesia does not take lightly the challenges and is fully committed to meeting them as this Convention will play a pivotal role in the nation’s development and in the protection of its only renewable natural resource. We look to all our friends here for similar commitments. In my view, these commitments can be demonstrated in no better way than by the early entry into force of the Convention. Furthermore, as a demonstration of our strong commitment to this Convention, Mr. Chairman, I would like to reiterate my Government’s offer to host the Secretariat of the Commission, soon to be established under the Convention, and I seek the favourable consideration and support of our friends here. We have a lot to offer and the Federated States of Micronesia is central to the fishing activities in the region as well as the membership of the Commission. Mr. Chairman, I would be remiss if I do not take a minute to thank everyone for their help and cooperation in this long and difficult process. The document we have today is testimony to our collective resolve to achieve the objectives we set for ourselves in the Majuro Declaration. I would like to describe the outcome of this process like the old Micronesian humble fisherman’s custom of claiming no catch at all for less than ten fish, one for at least ten, two for at least twenty, and so forth. We have certainly caught plenty as of today.

I would also like to express our utmost appreciation to those that have made financial contributions and sacrificed valuable time to the seven sessions of the Conference and intersessional meetings. Last but not least, we thank those who have hosted the meetings, especially the United States, for generously hosting four of the seven sessions and, in particular, for hosting this final and concluding session on such short notice.

-----

Japan

Japan, as a major fishing State in the western and central Pacific, has been promoting the cause of “responsible fisheries” in this area. From the first MHLC, held on 5 December 1994, to the present seventh Conference, Japan has been actively taking part in every MHLC meeting. As stated in our opening statement, our position has remained unchanged in that we are committed to the establishment of an international regime for conservation of highly migratory fish stocks in order to ensure sustainable fisheries in this region.

Over the last five years and at this seventh meeting, Japan has repeatedly voiced its points of view and tabled proposals for improvement of the Convention text with respect to the issues critical to our objectives. However, now with the latest version of the Convention draft in our hands, we see that it has failed to address the concerns we have pointed out, and does not reflect most of the critical concerns of major fishing states in the area. We are frustrated because the draft demonstrates a continued disregard of the issues we have raised over the past meetings.

Japan recognizes that the following issues remain unresolved and need to be addressed in the draft Convention:

· decision-making procedures should enable the Commission to take into account the views of the minority, such as Asian fishing nations and fishing entities in the Forum by way of incorporation of an Objection Clause.

· the northern sub-committee should be empowered with enhanced autonomy to address issues in consideration of socio-economic, cultural, traditional characteristics of fishing activities, and biological nature of tuna stocks in the northern area, or the northern boundary of the Convention Area should be set at 20 degrees north.

· the boarding and inspection scheme, the observer program on the high seas and provisions relating to VMS should be based on the flag-State-principle and should be practicable and preclude excessive burdens on the part of the fishermen;

· dispute settlement procedures should be within the framework of the Convention, based first on consent among concerned parties and should be unique to the regional organization;

· management measures for transshipment and carrier vessels should be implemented in a practical manner;

· any duplication with other regional fisheries management agreements, treaties or conventions with respect to areas and species, which imposes a double burden on fisheries, should be clearly excluded, and,

· references to UNFSA to which Japan, as well as some other MHLC members are not parties, should be deleted. These are the issues that have not been addressed in the latest draft. Furthermore, there are other issues needing further consideration.

In addition, we have a serious problem in the proposed function of the Preparatory Conference because in our view this function preempts some provisions of the Convention before it comes into effect.

Rulings by the Chairman are also among our greatest concerns. We question upon what kind of rules of procedure the Chairman bases his rulings during the seven sessions of MHLC. Our observation of the ways in which this Convention draft has been written leads us to doubt the fairness of the proceedings for drafting. We have noted that important issues have only been discussed among a small number of participants in small groups, without adequately reporting back to the plenary for consultation. Clearly, there was an absence of transparency for the meeting proceedings. All of these issues and questions are shared by the other major fishing States.

If the draft Convention were adopted as it stands, it is likely that Japan and others will choose not to participate in the Convention. The catches by those Asian fleets amount to more than 70 per cent of the total catch of highly migratory fish stocks in this area. If Japan and others were to be the members of the Convention, approximately 60 per cent of the total amount of financial contribution would be borne by these major Asian players in the fishery. It is highly doubtful if a regional fishery management organization lacking of those major players could operate effectively in terms of effective conservation and financial support.

Against this background, we are disappointed that the Chairman has called for an adoption, overriding our concerns over the matters that are critical for the interests of the major Asian players. Mr. Chairman, once again, we regrettably register with you this statement as an expression of our dissatisfaction with the text. Japan hereby opposes the adoption of the Convention. For these reasons, our constituency and Dilt will be unable to accept the Convention in the way it now stands.

However, Japan, as a responsible fishing nation, has a full support for the establishment of an effective regime for conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean. We are looking for an appropriate conservation and management regime with a balance of the interests among the coastal States and the fishing States in the near future.

For this reason, Japan is proposing to establish alternative conservation and management regimes in the western north Pacific and the central and western Pacific, respectively. We have submitted two documents: first "Essential Elements for a Future Regime Regarding Tuna and Tuna-like species in the Central and Western Pacific," and second "Elements for a Future Regime Regarding Highly Migratory Species in the Western North Pacific."

It is abundantly clear that Japan has a strong will to create such a proper regime, given the fact that Japan has reduced its fishing capacity for tuna long line fishing by 20 per cent for a reduction in fishing effort, following in good faith the UN FAO recommendation.

Last but not least, for the establishment of an international regime for conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks, we reiterate our commitment to continue our co-operation with participants.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I urge all the participants here to carefully consider whether or not it is more effective for the pursuit of conservation and management if the Asian fishing fleets operate outside the framework of the Convention, or if the framework is such that allows fair participation by the fishing States.

----- Kiribati (Hon. Emile Schutz, Minister of Natural Resources Development)

Mr. Chairman, it is an honour and privilege for us to be able to join all the other participants for this important and historic occasion. We want to take this opportunity therefore to thank you and your staff for the untiring efforts that you had put to bring the negotiations to a conclusion at this stage. We wish also to join previous speakers in congratulating the Government of Hawaii and the Western Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Council for the superb arrangement of the meeting in spite of the short notice due to unfortunate circumstances beyond our control.

The Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Central and Western Pacific which was adopted yesterday is one that we all need to have if we are serious about conserving and managing the tuna fish stocks in our region. It is regrettable that a few of the important players can not agree to adopt the Convention at this stage for reasons that their positions cannot be entirely entertained in the final text. Likewise, most of us would equally like to add to the final text a number of our positions in their entirety to reflect our various national interests. But we know quite well that in a multilateral negotiation like this the balance of advantage for all the participants must be maintained throughout. But that balance of advantage must be clearly guided by the objective of the Convention which is to conserve and manage sustainably the tuna stocks in our area. To lose sight of that objective is to defeat our purpose.

As one of the major resource owners, Kiribati stands committed to the objective of the Convention. Over half of our total national budget is obtained from fishing activities in our 3.55 million square kilometers of 200 miles exclusive economic zone. The uniqueness of our seawaters, in that they are separated by areas of high seas, speak for the urgent need to regulate fishing activities in the high seas. For Kiribati, tuna resources are our bread and butter. They are our only means of survival as a nation at this stage. We can not revert to land-based resources because there is none. We will therefore continue to rely heavily on the tuna resources in the many years to come. This is why we fully support the need to have a Convention of this kind to be in place at the earliest opportunity. This is why it is important that the Commission, once established, must be able to function effectively to achieve the objective of the Convention. And this is also why we believe that the Commission must be located in our area where the majority of the tuna stocks in question are found, and upon which our future development aspirations are centred.

Mr. Chairman, whilst we have joined the rest in adopting the Convention, and as much as we would like to join the others in signing the Convention during this inauguration ceremony, we are unable to do so at this stage. This must not be misconstrued to mean that we do not support the Convention. It is more to do with our internal procedures that we must go through before we can become a signatory. We are determined that it would not be long before we can do this.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, we are reminded that this will be our last meeting in Honolulu. But we know that there will be series of meetings needed in the preparatory work of the Commission and we would be keen to see that some of these meetings are held in some of the Pacific island countries where the majority of the tuna stocks are held.

And in time for the Commission to start to function in its new location, we would look forward to meeting you all at the airport in Kiribati.

-----

Republic of Korea

On behalf of my delegation and the Government of the Republic of Korea, I would like to extend my heart-felt gratitude to the Governments of the United States of America and the State of Hawaii for hosting a series of meetings of the MHLC in Honolulu. I also take this opportunity to express my appreciation to Your Excellency Satya Nandan for your incessant contribution in the field of international law, and specifically in the field of the conservation and management of the highly migratory fish stocks. Korea, as a fishing State, fully understands that the sustainability of fishery resources itself is one of the crucial factors for the sustenance of the Korean fishing industry. Therefore, for more than a decade, the Korean Government, with the strenuous support of Korean people and especially the Korean fishing industry, has joined cooperation with international fishery organizations and encouraged the Korean fishing industry to comply with a variety of the existing conservation measures.

Several years ago, we had agreed on the necessity of cooperation for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific. What we have differed, however, was about how we could achieve our common goal. The Multilateral High Level Conference, in this regard, could have been a precious venue to search for multilateral cooperation and to find ways to satisfy our urgent need in the western and central Pacific.

In this conference, the Korean delegation has raised several important issues including decision-making, direct quotation of UNIA’s provisions into the Convention text, application of double standard on the allocation of TAC and on the assessment of each member’s financial contribution, VMS data transmission and other issues concerning the compliance and enforcement provisions, etc. However, to my delegation’s regret, only a couple of these items were reflected in the final Convention text. Nevertheless, my delegation appreciates the effort of the coastal States and the United States of America which have made with regard to the two-chamber voting mechanism.

I wished that my delegation could have contributed more to the construction of the better Convention, so that all the delegations in this room could go back home with a satisfactory version of the MHLC Convention. On the other hand, I wished that the other delegations also could have showed more compromising positions towards the fishing States. In this regard, I regret that the final text of this Convention is not acceptable to several States including Korea.

I would like to appreciate all the delegations for their devotion shown in the course of the MHLC meetings.

-----

Marshall Islands (Hon. John M. Silk, Minister of Resources and Development)

Allow me to join other delegations in thanking the Government of the United States and the State of Hawaii for once again hosting us here in Honolulu. We are also grateful to the hard work of the MHLC Secretariat for facilitating our deliberations. Our further appreciation goes out to the Secretariat of the Forum Fisheries Agency for their dedicated work and commitment to its coastal State members. Please allow me also to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your excellent leadership and guidance throughout what has been a most difficult process. I commend you and your staff for the fine work you have helped to complete.

It is unfortunate that we have found ourselves here at the final session in discord amongst ourselves over what we believed was an acceptable text to all participants here. We are greatly disappointed by the manner in which some delegations have shown such blatant disregard for the level of cooperation that we have worked so hard to maintain. It is disappointing because some of these delegations represent countries with which we have bilateral fishing agreements. We concluded those agreements in the spirit of mutual cooperation and respect to our fishing requirements. Needless to say, Mr. Chairman, we are shocked by such adversarial approaches to this final negotiating session. It seems that when it comes to making a commitment for long-term conservation and sustainable management of the stocks in their entirety, that same cooperation seems to be missing. Unfortunately, we find ourselves in a situation whereby we are forced to consider reevaluating the basis for our relations.

Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, we are still reasonably satisfied with yesterday’s adoption of the MHLC Convention. While we continue to have difficulties with certain aspects of the Convention, we also recognize that what we have achieved today may be our only opportunity to establish a conservation and management arrangement for the region’s highly migratory fish stocks. For the Marshall Islands, this is essential to ensuring our continued economic development and the overall prosperity of our peoples. I must say, however, that I have serious reservations as to how the Convention’s provisions on decision-making will be practically implemented, particularly in light of the fact that we have made significant changes to important provisions which are absolutely critical to assuring the sustainability of our marine resources. While some delegations believe we will not be able to achieve our objectives without their financial contributions, we are, nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, absolutely determined to protect our most significant means for economic development and food security. This will be, as has always been, our fundamental aim.

I am, unfortunately, compelled to point out yet another issue which leaves us with considerable concern –that of the status of Chinese Taipei in this Convention. When we adopted the Majuro Declaration in 1997, we did so on the common understanding that the equal participation of all major stakeholders in this region’s fishery is essential to effective conservation and management. We are not concerned with the politics surrounding this issue, as we see this as secondary to our objectives. As one of the leading fishing nations in the region, it is critical that the membership of Chinese Taipei be revisited in the future, with a view to according them full membership and hence, equal status in the interest of the Conservation and sustainable use of highly migratory species in the Western and Central Pacific. While we are pleased to learn that Chinese Taipei can agree to the Convention, I am also disturbed by the fact that this issue has consumed so much of our valuable time and taken away from important discussions on other issues, which we believe are far more critical and fundamental.

I would hope that those who have entered these negotiations with the sole intent to achieve their own self-interests through insolent tactics would seriously review this Convention in light of their current position in the region’s fishery. We simply cannot continue these partnerships on a one-sided basis, nor can we tolerate insurgence on the part of some fishing States.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to end my intervention on a negative note. Despite our major concerns with the Convention as it now stands, the Marshall Islands will continue to do our part in implementing the principles for conservation and management as set out by the Convention, through the work of the Preparatory Conference and eventually, the MHLC Commission. Our determination to ensure sustainable conservation and management of our resources will be the basis for our future commitment and cooperation.

Allow me once again to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, on your excellent work and efforts to help us realize our goals as set out in the 1997 Majuro Declaration.

-----

Nauru

On behalf of the Government of Nauru, I wish to extend an apology from the Minister for not being able to attend this very important occasion for the signing of the Convention.

I wish to confirm that the Nauru delegation will sign the Final Act for the adoption of the Convention and the two Resolutions therein for the establishment of the Preparatory Conference and the expression of gratitude to those countries which hosted the seven sessions of the MHLC Conferences and those countries which generously provided funding for the Conferences.

The Nauru delegation will take back to Nauru the Convention text for the Government of Nauru to review first before Nauru signs the Convention.

Nauru notes with appreciation the inclusion of Chinese Taipei as a member of the Commission as provided for in the adopted text of the Convention. Although Nauru would have preferred to see Chinese Taipei as a Contracting Party, its inclusion as a member of the Commission nevertheless is sufficient for the purposes of involving all parties in the work of the Commission. Not only is Chinese Taipei a major fishing entity in the region, Chinese Taipei will also be a major financial contributor to the Commission. Nauru has every confidence that Chinese Taipei will participate effectively in the work of the Preparatory Conference and the Commission.

Nauru recognises the importance and the need for cooperation between the fishing nations and the coastal States on the implementation of the conservation and management measures for the fish stocks in the central and western Pacific.

Nauru also recognises the importance of the role of the coastal States under the Convention, taking into consideration that the exclusive economic zones make up a large portion of the Convention Area and that the coastal States have the sovereign right to implement compatible management and conservation measures within their exclusive economic zones, including the right to give access to foreign fishing fleets.

The people of Nauru, like our neighboring Pacific island brothers and sisters, are dependent on the marine and fisheries resources which surround our islands. Not only does the marine and fisheries resources sustain our livelihood, it is also a major resource of increasing economic value.

The fish stocks in the central and western Pacific need to be conserved, managed and utilised in a sustainable manner so that our peoples will benefit from it now and forever into the future.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, may I congratulate you for your able leadership and patience in directing and guiding this Multilateral High Level Conference to this its historical conclusion.

Mr. Chairman, Nauru will continue to give its support and dedication in upholding the principles and measures for the conservation and management of the fish stocks of the central and western Pacific.

-----

New Caledonia

As we are at the final text, and seeing that our interest have not been taken into due account, as it was in MHLC6, we deplored the significant set back in position which is presented today.

As official observer in the Pacific Forum, we regret that we cannot associate ourselves with the present text. We have tried to make significant compromises in our position which have been continuously not been taken into account and therefore it is with regrettable bitterness that we must leave away.

Nonetheless, the delegation from New Caledonia would like to thank the Chairman and his staff for all their efforts that they have employed on our behalf in trying to join the various divergent points of views and hope that our position will be heard in the near future.

We must not forget to thank all those participants who nonetheless supported our position.

-----

New Zealand

It is with great pleasure that the New Zealand Government will sign the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific here today. The Convention is of historical significance to the region. For over twenty years there has been discussion of the merits of a regional arrangement for the conservation and management of Pacific tuna which includes participation of coastal States and distant water fishing nations. The time has not been right for the conclusion of a broad-based organisation in the past. But with the increasing depletion of resources in other areas of the globe, coastal States and fisheries partners recognised the need to protect tuna stocks for the benefit of future generations, while preserving the sovereign rights of coastal States enshrined in the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention.

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention is the most comprehensive of any fisheries management arrangement in the world. It is first in many ways. It is the first agreement to base itself squarely on the provisions of United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement and will be a model for future fisheries conservation and management agreements of its type. It is the first such Convention to move away from a unilateral objection procedure, which has proved to be a significant hindrance to effective fisheries conservation and management. It provides the most robust basis for effective monitoring, control and surveillance on the high seas of any tuna agreement in the world.

New Zealand considers that the Convention fairly reflects the balance of interests in fisheries conservation and management in the region. It incorporates major concessions on the part of coastal States to distant water fishing nations. Yet the end product is one in which New Zealand considers that all interested players should cooperate.

For Tokelau the Convention is of special significance. Tuna fishing is critical to subsistence living in Tokelau and the only means for future economic independence. New Zealand and Tokelau are therefore pleased that the Convention will enable Tokelau to participate in the work of the future management arrangement.

The Convention is also of special significance to New Zealand in another way. It is with great honour that New Zealand accepts the responsibility of depositary of the Convention and with it the special role of convening the Preparatory Conference. We hope that participants can expeditiously decide on a permanent home for the Commission within the region.

Finally, New Zealand wishes to pay tribute to the tireless efforts of our Chair, Ambassador Satya Nandan, to bridge differences among us. Without his vision, patience, skill, and integrity it would not have been possible to open a Convention for signature here today. New Zealand regrets, however, that the Convention could not be adopted by consensus. We sincerely hope that those who could not fully support the Convention will reflect further; will recognise the concessions made by all other participants, and realise that if we are to be effective we must move into the future with a Convention which provides a solid basis for cooperation in the Pacific region.

-----

Niue

It is indeed a privilege for me to be here on behalf of the Government and People of Niue to participate in and witness the concluding of the Multilateral High level Conference process on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, which is truly an historical occasion.

Before I continue, let me express on behalf of my Minister, Hon Dion Taufitu, his most sincere apologies for being unable to be here. He had very much hoped to be here for this momentous occasion, unfortunately other important travel commitments have not afforded him the privilege of being here in time.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to join previous speakers in thanking the Government of the United States of America, the State of Hawaii, and the Western Pacific Fisheries Management Council for hosting not only this special last session but also the last three preceding sessions. We thank them for their generosity and warm hospitality extended to us on all occasions. We would also like to extend the same sentiments of appreciation to the Governments of the Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, and Japan for hosting earlier sessions of this most important Conference process.

The highly migratory fish stocks and associated and dependant fish stocks covered by the MHLC Convention are of significant importance to the people of Niue, primarily as a major food source but equally important as a source of income generation. To ensure that these fish stocks will always be available for these purposes is therefore very important to us. As a member of the South Pacific Forum and the Forum Fisheries Agency we have long recognised the need to cooperate with distant water fishing nations and other coastal States in order to develop an appropriate conservation and management regime that will ensure the effective management of the highly migratory fish resources occurring in this region. Examples of other major fisheries collapsing through in-effective management or the lack of management has brought us together in a shared desire and effort to ensure that the stocks of fish that our creator has provided for the well being of all our people are conserved and managed in a sustainable manner for the benefit of future generations. The Majuro Declaration is testament of our shared commitment to co-operate for this purpose.

The last four years of negotiations has not always been easy, and all Parties have had to make concessions in many areas. We are comforted however to see that in recognition of the importance of protecting the fish stocks and all our interests we have achieved a major step forward by the creation of the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks for the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. While this is truly a great achievement for which we can congratulate ourselves, it is only the beginning of much work that lies ahead. We have heard from the scientific experts in our region that there is already cause for concern for some of the species that occur in the Western and Central Pacific, it is therefore timely that we conclude this convention and commit ourselves to bringing it into force at the earliest possible time to ensure that our co-operative efforts are in time to ensure the well being of the stocks. Let me assure the meeting that Niue is committed to this process and will endeavour to ratify this Convention as soon as possible, and hopes others will also.

Mr. Chairman, while, as a Coastal State, we have made what we feel are major concessions particularly in the final stages of this negotiation, Niue can accept this final Convention text and encourage those that have expressed reservations to cooperate with all others to ensure that we are able to achieve the objective of this Convention. Niue is committed to full-filling our obligations to conserve and manage the highly migratory fish stocks that pass through our waters. Mr. Chairman, there will be areas and times at which, as a small Island developing state we may require assistance and we note with appreciation that this has been recognised by the participants of this Conference and is provided for within the Convention.

Mr. Chairman, we note there will be established a Preparatory Conference, which will prepare for the entry into force of the Convention and the work of the Commission, and the establishment of a commission headquarters. We believe that it is appropriate that these be located in one of the FFA Pacific Island countries in the Western and Central Pacific.

With those few remarks there remains one thing left for me to do and that is to thank you, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my Government for your truly outstanding chairmanship and untiring efforts to lead this process to a successful conclusion. In the same vein I would like to thank your assistants, Mr. Michael Lodge and Mr. Blaise Kuemlangan, for their significant contributions also to this process. I would also take this opportunity to thank the Director and the staff of the FFA secretariat for the work and service they have provided to us, and finally would like to thank the Conference organising secretariat for their excellent service.

-----

Palau (Hon. Marcelino Melairei, Minister of Resources and Development)

On behalf of the People and the Government of the Republic of Palau, I would like to express Palau’s deep appreciation for the labor that all participants have put into this vital undertaking. We should take great pride in the high degree of patience and perseverance which has characterized our efforts to arrive at an effective, practical, and comprehensive multilateral mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. I am sure that all delegations share Palau’s hope that the progress of these conferences will continue in our future work to preserve these vital resources.

For many of the nations participating in this process, including Palau, fish stocks are a vital resource for fueling development. They provide food, employment, and revenue, and represent one of the few sustainable resources on which Pacific island nations have been able to rely. At the same time, the region’s fish stocks represent an extremely important commodity for fishing interests from within the region and from outside the region alike. As a result of the important role of the region’s fish stocks to both coastal States and fishing nations, and in light of examples of the ill effects of over-harvesting of fish stocks elsewhere, it is clear that each participant in this endeavor has a stake in the wise management and conservation of the region’s fish stocks. Further, because fish do not respect political boundaries, efforts at monitoring and regulating the taking of migratory fish in the region and conserving those stocks must be transnational in scope.

The Republic of Palau is proud to be here in order to exercise and preserve its sovereign rights. Some may believe that agreeing to accept the findings and decisions of another entity constitutes a surrender of sovereignty. But we believe that by participating in the drafting of the Convention, a nation is exercising its sovereignty. By becoming a party to the Convention, a nation is exercising its sovereignty. By committing to the obligations imposed by the Convention, a nation is exercising its sovereignty. The fact that one of those obligations may include accepting the decisions of the Commission pursuant to the freely-agreed upon terms of the Convention does not change the nature of those acts of sovereignty into the surrender of sovereignty. This Convention arises from the recognition that no single government can effectively and equitably regulate the taking of migratory fish stocks for the long-term, sustainable good of all those claiming interests in such stocks. By joining together, we fully express our sovereignty.

The Republic of Palau appreciates the effort, insight, and patience which has characterized these conferences. We would particularly like to express our gratitude to the Chairman for his energy, effort, and seemingly endless patience. It is only through his able leadership, guidance, and wisdom that we have been able to achieve the progress we have made. We are especially grateful that a way has been found to include the participation of Chinese Taipei with the other members of the Convention. We know that this issue presented immense difficulties and thank you Mr. Chairman, sir, for your perseverance. While we have collectively concluded and adopted this Convention, Palau remains disappointed that, despite all of our best efforts, we have not been able to find a formula through which we could secure the broader support of our fishing partners. Palau has worked together productively with our fishing partners on a bilateral basis, and we hope that in the future we will find our way forward to an equally successful relationship at this multilateral level.

Finally, Palau would like to thank the United States, the State of Hawaii and the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council for the grace and hospitality they have shown us in this and in past conferences. Your efforts have greatly assisted our work here.

Mr. Chairman, distinguished colleagues, today I am pleased to signify Palau’s support of all of our efforts by signing the Convention on behalf of the Republic of Palau.

-----

Papua New Guinea (Hon. Ron Ganarafo, Minister of Fisheries)

Firstly may I congratulate those who had the vision to embark on the MHLC process and the courage to remain faithful to not only the process but more importantly, the commitments made in the Majuro Declaration.

It is enormously reassuring to be a witness to the culmination of such a demanding process, one that provides both the fundamentals for meaningful protection of the region’s tuna stocks and a clear opportunity for Pacific Island countries.

It gives my delegation great pleasure to confirm a little known fact about the origins of this MHLC process. The commitment for Papua New Guinea and most Pacific countries began with the 1977 South Pacific Forum meeting in Port Moresby as highlighted in your Statement. The vision and foresight of our leaders began taking shape even before the Law of the Sea was adopted in 1982. It is fitting therefore that my delegation should be associated with this historic occasion. As the host of a major share of the regional tuna stocks, my Government has placed the highest priority on ensuring proper management arrangements for those stocks. This has brought quite a profound change to our perceptions of the fishery and this is now increasingly reflected both in our policies and our practices.

Although Papua New Guinea is not signing the Convention today due to our internal requirements, it was a deliberate decision on the part of my Government for an appropriate Ministerial level presence at the conclusion and adoption of this Convention to demonstrate the significance my Government attaches to this milestone management and conservation arrangement. My being a witness to the adoption and related procedures reaffirms the commitment of my Government to enduring and responsible fishery management arrangements. Papua New Guinea will be doing everything possible to expedite internal requirements to execute signature of the Convention with minimum delay.

The Convention foreshadows change. The nature of change depends on the disposition of participants towards signature and eventual entry into force of the Convention. Already new alliances are emerging in the sector and new participants stand at the door ready to play a significant role in the fishery. Papua New Guinea welcomes these prospects.

There has been little substantive change in the fishery over the past twenty years. The original promise has never fully materialized. This has caused anguish for many small Pacific Island countries and underlined still further the frustration of our dependency. But I must also add that many of our wounds were self-inflicted and it is for this reason as well that I applaud the original vision of those who were the architects of the Convention. We now have the motive and the confidence to change.

I also sense the frustration of those who perceive that they have somehow lost out in this process. Most though, including my delegation are willing to accept the outcome of the process and adapt to change. In fact, we see opportunity in its very presence. I must however, leave no illusion in anybody’s mind that Papua New Guinea has little sympathy or patience for those who stubbornly seek to maintain the status quo. This flies in the face of the legitimate aspirations of those less developed nations seeking to gain meaningful economic benefits from and participation in one of the very few renewable natural resources available to them.

Papua New Guinea commends you on your diligence, tenacity and professionalism in the manner in which you have steered the MHLC process to this momentous occasion. We register our sincere appreciation for those who have been part of your team, especially those who have contributed from behind the scenes. Our very sincere appreciation goes also to the colleagues with whom we have cooperated and persevered over the long and arduous process to reach the goal we set ourselves in the Majuro Declaration.

We look forward to the next phase of this process, which is having the administrative machinery in place for the implementation of the provisions of the Convention. To this end my delegation associates itself with the statement made by the FFC Chairman in our desire to see the Commission seat located in an FFC country.

To the Government of the United States of America and the State of Hawaii, we extend our heartfelt gratitude for their generous and warm hospitality showered upon my delegation during the last several days.

-----

Samoa (Hon. Mafasolia Papu Vaai, Minister of Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries and Meteorology)

It is indeed my pleasure to be in this beautiful city and to being able to sign the Convention on the Conservation and Management of highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. And in that connection let me thank the delegation of the United States, the State of Hawaii and the staff of the Western Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Council for the hospitality accorded my delegation and for the professional and efficient organisation of this conference. Please accept my sincere gratitude. I would like, Mr. Chairman, to acknowledge your significant contribution to the successful conclusion of this Convention and the personal sacrifices that you had to make to accomplish this task. Without your dedication, your considerable experience in maritime issues, diplomatic skills and evenhandedness, we would not have completed our work in the time frame we allotted ourselves in Majuro in 1997. Mr. Chairman, the peoples of this region owe you a vote of gratitude.

Let me also, Mr. Chairman, pay tribute to the commitment of our other colleagues in this negotiation, in particular our distant water fishing partners, to achieving an effective and practical conservation and management regime for highly migratory fish stocks that we all depend on for both our personal and economic livelihood. I particularly appreciate the spirit of understanding and compromise that has characterised our negotiations culminating in the document we are about to sign.

Mr. Chairman, the adoption and signature of our Convention is indeed a major and monumental achievement, being the first conservation and management arrangement tailored to the provisions of the Law of the Sea and the Fish Stocks Agreement. However we must remind ourselves that this is only the beginning of a process we have to complete if we are to go beyond the mere expression of good intentions and promises to act responsibly.

Mr. Chairman, I refer to the fact that before anything concrete is done on the provisions of our now completed Convention, we also have to ratify the Convention, bring it into force and enact appropriate local legislation and measures to bring to life the provisions of the Convention. Whether the Convention comes to life in the immediate future, the distant future or even at all, is dependent on the resoluteness of our commitment to, and faith in the essence and the crucial importance of our Convention to the continued good health of our tuna resource and the economic well-being of our peoples. I believe we should not allow ourselves the luxury of time. We should continue our cooperation and partnership to quickly bring into force this Convention. Towards that end, Mr. Chairman, I can assure you of Samoa's willing and full cooperation.

Mr. Chairman, it remains for me to wish you continued success in your service to the international community and wish you and all the delegations a safe journey home when it is time to return.

-----

Chinese Taipei

First of all, on behalf of the delegation of Chinese Taipei, I would like to express my sincere congratulations to the Chair and all the distinguished delegates of this Conference for achieving such a significant regional instrument in this new millennium. We believe that the adoption of this Convention offers us a window of opportunity for the establishment of a regional fisheries conservation and management mechanism in the region. We also believe that the Convention has reflected the overwhelming view of the participants of the Conference by granting us Commission Member status. Any doubt and debate on this issue is pointless and is an insult to the collective wisdom of all.

Mr. Chairman, for the purpose of conservation and management of the highly migratory fish stocks in the region, Chinese Taipei has participated in the MHLC negotiations since the Majuro round in 1997. We have seen ourselves as a constructive force in the negotiation and formulation of this Convention. Accordingly, we have approached all the issues, regardless they were substantive fisheries issues or status-related ones, with a belief that the importance of conservation and management of fish stocks in the region should transcend the limitation of traditional political or geographic boundaries. We support a Convention Area that covers the entire migratory range of the fish stocks concerned in the region. We endorse a comprehensive conservation and management mechanism that provides institution and functions. We call for cooperation and sharing of experiences and aspiration between coastal and fishing nations.

After the adoption of this Convention, while we are looking forward to the advent of a new century, we shall also look ahead for the establishment of a new regional mechanism within the shortest period of time. More significantly, this mechanism incorporates a leading fishing nation in the region to participate in a substantive way. In addition, this mechanism will become the first of its kind which carries the value and aspiration of UNIA.

As a leading fishing nation in the region, we are regretful that our status under the Convention does not fully reflect our importance in the region and the potential contribution that we will offer. Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, Chinese Taipei will maintain its devotion to the goal of this Convention in the same way we have done and illustrated in the MHLC process. As a Commission member, Chinese Taipei is willing to cooperate with other members to further the objectives of the Convention on both multilateral and bilateral bases.

Furthermore, I would like to express our deepest appreciation to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Secretary, Mr. Lodge and the staff for the tireless efforts and sacrifices you made during the Conference. Our thanks also go to the Government of the United States and the State of Hawaii for their hospitality.

-----

Tuvalu (Hon. Faimalaga Luka, Minister of Natural Resources and Environment)

Mr. Chairman, may I, on behalf of the Tuvalu delegation and the Government of Tuvalu congratulate you sincerely in steering and guiding this difficult and hard process to a successful conclusion. It has also been a long process with its inception during the first multilateral high level conference on the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific in Honiara, Solomon Islands, in December 1994. During that period and especially when you assumed the unenviable and enormous task of chairing this MHLC process at its second session in Majuro, Marshall Islands, in June 1997, my delegation and Government has not, for one moment, doubted your ability to bring this process to a successful conclusion. It was through your competent and capable leadership that you were able to bring together the differing and wide ranging views and interests of the different interest groups that were involved in this process, within the framework of the convention that we have adopted yesterday and ready for signature today.

May I once again congratulate you for bringing this process to a successful conclusion and I suppose congratulation is also due to the hard working officials of all delegations who have worked tirelessly over these lengthy negotiations.

Mr. Chairman, may I also join other delegations in thanking our host Government, the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the State of Hawaii for their fabulous hospitality extended to us not only during this session, but I understand the same hospitality was extended during the previous three consecutive sessions. There is no doubt that the surrounding environment of Honolulu and especially the magnificent facilities provided by the Hawaii convention center contributed significantly to the success of this MHLC process.

Mr. Chairman, today we witness one of the greatest landmark achievements for this region in terms of the conservation and management of our highly migratory fisheries that have become so crucial for the livelihood and economy of some countries in the region. For those countries like mine, which are not so well endowed with natural resources, these fisheries is our only viable resource which has provided for many years the necessary protein to our people and recently have been a reliable source of revenue that support our fragile economy.

Although, we have started this process with different interests and a different national perspective, we were all united under one objective which is the need to conserve and manage these fisheries to ensure their sustainable utilization and harvest. With all these differing national interests and perspectives the negotiation was always going to be hard and difficult and it definitely turned out that way. There was a lot of trading and give and take on some very crucial issues by many delegations with the view to progress the negotiations. So my delegation, Mr. Chairman, does not view or regard any real winners in this process. The Convention that we have adopted is a product of a lot of compromises, some were very painful compromises made by some delegation but they simply have to be made in order to achieve a viable and workable regime that will effectively conserve and manage the targeted fish stocks who are the real winners of these negotiations. Although, the text of the Convention does not provide the most ideal framework for the most effective management regime, my delegation is still confident that it will provide at least a framework upon which most needed conservation and management measures would be formulated and implemented. Now that we have adopted a convention, after long and hard negotiations, more hard work await all of us to show our real commitment to the objectives of the convention we have just adopted. Our efforts will be wasted if we do not maintain the momentum that enabled us to reach this status of adopting the convention and signing it.

My delegation has come prepared to sign the Convention and we will do so today. While we await the Convention to come into force, there are a lot of work that need to be done and my delegation would support the work of the preparatory conference.

In terms of our participation at the work of the Preparatory Conference and eventually at the work of the commission, my delegation will definitely rely on the financial facility that the Convention envisages to assist the small island developing states in fulfilling their obligations under the convention. May I therefore plea for the cooperation and goodwill of the well endowed states to expeditiously develop the necessary financial facility that will assist the small island developing States.

Finally Mr. Chairman, my delegation pledges its continued support to the work of the Preparatory Conference and in due course the work of the Commission.

-----

United States

The United States came to this Seventh Session of the Multilateral High-Level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific prepared to conclude a convention provided that it meets two primary objectives: first, to establish an effective system for ensuring the conservation and long term sustainability of the highly migratory fish stocks of the region throughout their range; second, to ensure that the system accommodates the basic interests of those fishing in the region as well as the coastal states of the region.

The United States will sign the Convention today because we believe it meets these objectives in a fair and balanced way. We would have much preferred that the Convention had been adopted by consensus. We came to Honolulu prepared to go the last mile in the search for consensus. I regret that this spirit, which I believe permeated our discussions, was met with the intemperate words and proposals we heard repeated yesterday -- proposals that are at odds with the steps agreed to by the international community over the past decade to promote responsible fishing. We for one are not prepared to roll back that progress.

But, in our view, we must look forward not backwards. The United States sees the Convention we have adopted in this light. It represents a unique opportunity for us to put in place a framework for the conservation and long term sustainability of fish populations of vital importance to the region before they come under severe pressure – and we know that pressure will come. The United States is prepared to work with all of those who participated in this conference – including, in particular, those that did not support adoption of the Convention – to find within its bounds the consensus that eluded us yesterday.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the Forum Fisheries Committee, along with the Forum Fisheries Agency, for working closely with our delegation during the MHLC process. The United States values our relationship with the members of the FFC and looks forward to working in the same spirit of cooperation and trust that has infused this relationship over the past decade. Through our signature today we commit to continue to build on and expand this trust and cooperation with the FFC, and not only with the FFC, but also, as I have stressed, with all of the other States and entities represented here, to bring into force and implement this most important agreement. Mr. Chairman – one personal note. It has been an honor for me to participate in this conference at its final rounds. I would like to pay tribute to Brian Hallman, who preceded me at this microphone, for the essential contributions he made to the success of this effort. I also believe that the future is in good hands when I look to Bill Gibbons-Fly and those others who will carry this work forward.

To you Mr. Chairman, to Michael, to Blaise, to Kitty, and to all of those in the Secretariat and behind the scenes who have made today’s event possible, the United States delegation extends its admiration and deepest thanks.

In conclusion, the writer Paul Theroux has described the Pacific as a universe, rather than merely an ocean -- where islands are stars and archipelagoes are galaxies. These include American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands, as well as the State of Hawaii – our host. As I look around this table today and reflect on our work together over the last six years, Theroux’s description strikes us as particularly appropriate. Our Pacific universe is composed of many different peoples and cultures, which have varied needs and interests, but what binds us together is the desire to secure the future of the fisheries resources of the region-- today we pledge ourselves further to that task. As we launch this convention on a long and difficult, but exciting voyage, those stars and galaxies will be our guideposts.

-----

Vanuatu (Hon. Albert Ravutia, Minister of Agriculture, Quarantine, Forestry and Fisheries)

It is indeed a great honour for me, as a Government Minister, to represent the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu in the very important MHLC Ministerial Level Conference hosted in the sumptuous surroundings of this beautiful island of Honolulu.

On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu, I would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Government of the United States of America and the State of Hawaii for hosting the final session of the MHLC process in Honolulu.

The Government of the Republic of Vanuatu would also like to express its gratitude to you, Mr. Chairman, for your dedication, efforts and leadership in steering the MHLC negotiations to successful conclusion.

Mr. Chairman, as a coastal State as well as a fishing nation, Vanuatu is committed to the principles and obligations embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the associated Implementing Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks that calls for cooperative efforts by both the coastal States and other States participating in the harvesting of the highly migratory fish species to establish regional arrangements to conserve and manage these fisheries. Vanuatu is grateful that the successful consultation and negotiation processes of the MHLCs has now gradually eventuated in the achievement of that important objective.

It has taken us at least a total of six years, since its inception in December 1994 at the first Multilateral High Level Conference on the South Pacific Tuna Fisheries in Honiara, Solomon Islands, no negotiate this Convention. We are now at the end of that very long and winding road of negotiations. We now have the final draft of the Convention before us to adopt and to pledge our individual Government support and acceptance by signing it. From now on, there is no turning back. The adoption of the Convention does not necessarily mean that we have reached the end of our work. The adoption of the Convention will mark the beginning of a new journey, which will take us to achieving our ultimate goal and development vision in the fisheries sector, which is to foster economic growth and at the some time ensure adequate and sustainable supply of fish to meet the nutritional needs of our people.

Effective utilization of the tuna resources does not stop with the adoption of this conservation and management Convention. In order for this Convention to effectively meet its objective, parties to this Convention must establish greater cooperation, collaboration and effective dialogue. The Government of Vanuatu view this Convention as the ultimate solution to the common concern shared by all coastal States with regards to sustainable management and conservation of valuable tuna resources in the central and western Pacific. It establishes the framework and foundations to manage and conserve the valuable tuna resources in the central and western Pacific.

Vanuatu reaffirms its view that a multilateral approach to the conclusion of this Convention, which provides the framework for greater cooperation with the distant water fishing nations is the best means of maximizing returns from its region’s fisheries. We must endeavour to set aside our national differences and personal goals; and strive to achieve our common goal and objective as stipulated in the Convention.

Mr. Chairman, Vanuatu again reaffirms its support for this Convention, which is created specifically to sustainably manage and conserve the tuna resources of the central and western Pacific. The Government of the Republic of Vanuatu is ready to adopt and to sign this Convention.

-----

Ecuador

On behalf of the Republic of Ecuador, I would like to express my deepest satisfaction for the adoption and signing of this Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.

As I said last Wednesday, we think it is very much important that you would finally reach an agreement, as you have now. Into these tough negotiations, some of your antagonist positions did get closer, some did not. I think there are no winners nor losers; from my point of view the only winner is the future conservation of the Pacific Ocean fisheries.

I hope that in the near future most of the countries that now are not signing this important Convention, will do it, so this Commission will be born strongly.

I wish this organization the best success and once again invite you to work closely with your eastern Pacific Ocean neighbors and to keep the Convention open for future participation.

My thanks again to the United States of America and the State of Hawaii Government for their great hospitality.

-----

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

The effective conservation and management of the world's fisheries resources presents a major challenge for the international community, given the overexploited state of many of the world's fish stocks. The challenge for all States and fishing entities, irrespective of their roles in the fisheries sector, is to ensure that fisheries resources are utilized in a long-term sustainable manner, and that current levels of exploitation do not prejudice future access to these resources.

The tuna resources of the western and central Pacific Ocean are the most prolific, productive and valuable resources of their type in the world today. Apart from their key role in international trade and commerce, these resources also play an inherently important role in the daily lives of the small-island developing States and territories situated in the region. To a greater or lesser extent, the region's tuna resources contribute substantively to food security and social and economic development. Indeed, probably no where else in the world are fisheries resources so important to these island States and territories, given their relative international geographic isolation, physical and economic vulnerability and paucity of alternative opportunities for development. Prudent action and forethought is therefore imperative for the utilization and further development of the region's tuna resources so that future generations will be able to benefit from these resources in the same abundance and with the same reliability that our generation has been able to do so.

As has been noted in previous sessions of this Conference, FAO warmly welcomes the initiative to establish a Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. As we all know, the purpose of this Convention, in very broad terms, is to facilitate the rational utilization of the region's highly migratory fish stocks. The Convention is comprehensive and complex. Nonetheless, it seeks to implement faithfully and transparently the UN Fish Stocks Agreement, which, has been hailed as a post-UNCED milestone in fisheries.

The conclusion of the Convention that will underpin the day-to-day work of the new Commission is the result of intensive and frequently difficult negotiations, and as such the Convention text represents a compromise on the part of all participants. No participant will be totally satisfied with the text, but that is the nature of the outcome of a negotiation process. However, with commitment and good faith, and a real concern by all participants to achieve sustainable practice in the region's tuna fisheries, initial differences in negotiating positions are likely to fall away as the work of the Commission gets underway.

While it is recognized that the negotiation phase was difficult, it might be anticipated that the next phase that involves the implementation of the new Convention will be even tougher. Renewed commitment on the part of all participants will be needed. In addition, there must be a commitment not to undermine the work of the Commission by those States and fishing entities that, for whatever reason, do not participate directly in the Commission's work. Without such a commitment by these States and entities the work of the Commission could, in the extreme, be rendered largely futile.

The opening of the Convention for signature could herald a new era for fisheries management and cooperation in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. As the States and entities moves forward to meet the fisheries challenges of the region it might also be anticipated optimistically that new modes of cooperation will be established with organizations that have well served the fisheries interests over recent decades.

In tandem with the implementation of the UN Fish Stocks Agreement FAO continues to promote the implementation of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the FAO Compliance Agreement and the FAO international fisheries plans of action. With different foci and emphasizes, each of these instruments has the common objective of enhancing fisheries conservation and management. Taken as a package, and if implemented in a consistent manner, it might be anticipated that these instruments will improve the general state of world fisheries.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, FAO would like to record its thanks to the Conference convenors for the opportunity to observe this Conference process. FAO would also like to pay tribute to you, Ambassador Nandan, for your untiring efforts and the exceptional contribution you have made to the process. Without your skilful leadership and guidance, Sir, and the benefit of your keen insight into the fisheries needs, issues and politics of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, we might not have reached the same point as we have done today.

----- ANNEX 10

ARRANGEMENT FOR THE PARTICIPATION OF FISHING ENTITIES

Considering that Chinese Taipei participated in the Multilateral High-level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (“the Conference”), Recalling that Chinese Taipei participated in the adoption of the Majuro Declaration of 13 June 1997 in which the States, territories and fishing entities represented at the second session of the Conference declared their commitment to establish a mechanism for the conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean within an overall time-frame of three years from June 1997, Considering further that Chinese Taipei participated in the adoption of the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean at Honolulu on 4 September 2000 together with the Final Act of the Conference, the authentic texts of which are appended hereto,

The Conference HEREBY INVITES Chinese Taipei, as a fishing entity, and Chinese Taipei HEREBY DECLARES its intent: (a) to participate in the Preparatory Conference established by the resolution attached to the Final Act of the Conference, (b) subject to the fulfilment of its domestic legal requirements, to agree to be bound by the regime established by the Convention in accordance with article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, and to participate in the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean in accordance with the Convention.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized to that effect, have appended their signature hereto.

DONE at Honolulu this fifth day of September, two thousand, in a single original. The original text of this Arrangement shall be deposited in the treaty archives of the Government of New Zealand which will circulate a certified copy thereof to Chinese Taipei and to all signatory States to the Convention.

For Chinese Taipei:

Chairman of the Multilateral High-level Conference on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean: