FIRST MEETING OF THE PARTIES TO THE TREATY ON CO-OPERATION ON FISHERIES SURVEILLANCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC REGION Rarotonga, 7 October 2007

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS & OUTCOMES

1. Representatives from , Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, , , , , , , , , , and met in Rarotonga, Cook Islands on 7 October 2007 for the First Meeting of the Parties to the Niue Treaty on Co-operation on Fisheries Surveillance and Law Enforcement in the South Pacific Region (Niue Treaty). The List of Participants is appended as Attachment A. Agenda Item 1: Welcome and Opening 2. The meeting was opened by the Deputy Director-General, Dr. Transform Aqorau. Dr. Aqorau welcomed delegates to the First Meeting of the Parties to the Niue Treaty and thanked them for making themselves available to meet on a Sunday afternoon. Dr. Aqorau noted that the purpose of the meeting was to consider two major issues relating to the implementation of the Treaty. These were: (i) the proposed establishment of a multilateral subsidiary agreement under the Treaty and (ii) interest of the United States and France to accede to the Treaty. The meeting was requested by three Parties, namely: Fiji, and Solomon Islands. Chair 3. Mr. Apolosi Turaganivalu was acclaimed as Chair. Agenda Item 2: Apologies 4. Apologies were received from the Marshall Islands and Niue. Agenda Item 3: Adoption of Agenda 5. The agenda, appended as Attachment B , was adopted. Agenda Item 4: Multilateral Subsidiary Agreement under the Niue Treaty 6. The Secretariat presented Working Paper 1: Multilateral Subsidiary Agreement under the Niue Treaty . The paper provided a brief background to the Niue Treaty and the current status of bilateral and trilateral subsidiary agreements under the Niue Treaty. The paper noted that the idea of a multilateral subsidiary arrangement was developed as a result of increasing use of multilateral enforcement exercises which have been undertaken in the past few years. Such an arrangement would enable a more integrated approach to fisheries surveillance and enforcement operations. It was noted that bilateral and trilateral subsidiary agreements had been effective in securing compliance. However, it was noted that the proposed multilateral subsidiary agreement was not intended to supplant the existing or future bilateral and multilateral arrangements or agreements. 7. The background and the impetus which led to the concept of a multilateral subsidiary agreement was discussed. The Secretariat noted that the working draft presented an outline of the

1 elements of a multilateral agreement. The Secretariat noted that it was intended that the draft would form the basis of the multilateral subsidiary agreement. 8. The Secretariat explained that the recommendation provided in the paper include the establishment of a drafting working group (DWG) consisting of suitable senior government representatives for considering the policy and legal aspects and the implications of such legally binding inter-governmental agreements to consider and further work on a draft agreement before the next MCS Working Group (MCSWG) meeting. The MCSWG could consider the outcomes from the DWG from a practical perspective and provide technical advice back to the DWG prior to the 2008 annual meeting of the Forum Fisheries Committee. It was explained that since this was the first time for the Parties to meet, the focus of the meeting was to consider the process in taking the issue forward rather than to examine in detail the policy, legal and technical implications and aspects of the draft. 9. The Secretariat noted that the proposal was prompted by the need to develop new approaches towards compliance, particularly in light of conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission, and the need to enforce these measures. 10. Papua New Guinea thanked the Secretariat for organising the meeting. It expressed concern about the delays in the distribution of the working papers especially given the gravity and importance that the recommendations that Members were being asked to consider. These concerns were shared by New Zealand, and Samoa. 11. The Parties: (i) agreed to further investigate the concept of a multilateral type of agreement, including how these complement existing and future subsidiary bilateral agreements; (ii) noted the draft working text and agreed to develop and formulate a TOR inter- sessionally for a Working Group that would exchange views electronically on the draft text with one another using the Secretariat as a facilitator for the exchange of e-mails; and (iii) noted that if required, the working group could meet prior to the next MCS Working Group meeting to develop issues that arise out of the electronic exchanges. Agenda Item 5: Accession of United States and France to the Niue Treaty 12. The Secretariat presented Working Paper 2: Accession of the US and France to the Niue Treaty. The paper discussed opening the Niue Treaty for accession by the United States and France. The paper also discussed the implications that this might have on the Parties. 13. Samoa queried whether non-FFA members could become a party to the Niue Treaty. The Secretariat clarified that the Treaty is open to non-FFA members, provided all the Parties agreed. 14. New Zealand noted the importance of considering involving the United States and France in the Niue Treaty given that they were making significant contributions with respect to providing maritime surveillance support in the Region, and asked for the implications of such involvement on current treaty obligations and expectations by the Parties. 15. The Secretariat explained that current treaty obligations by the Parties would not be affected and further explained that the United States, in particular, was interested in the operational aspects of the Treaty. The Secretariat also noted that the United States and France were already actively involved in assisting the Parties combat IUU fishing. This was done

2 through the provision of aerial surveillance flights and also the participation by the United States Coastal Guard in several regional compliance operations. 16. Australia supported the idea of the United States and France acceding to the Niue Treaty and explained that the benefits of having the United States and France become party should not only be seen as a benefit to the Pacific Island States but also to the region as a whole. Greater cooperation of surveillance and enforcement activities with United States and French Territories in the region would improve fisheries enforcement efforts within most coastal states’ waters in the WCPO, making it harder for illegal operators to exploit gaps between different jurisdictions. 17. The Cook Islands also supported the proposal, particularly from the perspective of surveillance of the EEZs and high seas to address IUU activities in the region. 18. Fiji expressed concern that this might shut the door to other non-FFA members who may wish to become involved in surveillance enforcement and accede to the treaty, which may not be in the interest of the Parties, a view which was shared by Samoa. Further information was sought on this issue from the Secretariat. 19. Australia noted that the United States participation in the Niue Treaty would promote a greater understanding of PIC’s efforts to combat IUU fishing in waters under their jurisdiction. This could in-turn provide a market advantage for PIC imports of tuna products into the United States as it was considering imposing a legislative ban on imports from IUU caught fish. Australia also asked if both the US and France had clearly expressed interest to accede to the Treaty. 20. The Secretariat explained that they had done so repeatedly at the meetings of the MCS Working Group. 21. The Federated States of Micronesia sought clarification as to whether a non-party to the Niue Treaty can become a party to a subsidiary agreement under the Niue Treaty. The Secretariat advised that this would not be possible given that the Niue Treaty required at least two Parties to the Niue Treaty to be involved. However, that did not preclude the Parties from entering into an agreement with the United States to undertake surveillance activities in their EEZ. 22. The meeting discussed the process required to progress the issue. In this regard, two options were considered. The first was for each Party to notify the depository that it has no difficulty with the accession by the United States and France. The second was for the Parties to wait until the United States and France formally applied for accession to the Treaty before they notify their approval to the Depositary. The Parties agreed to the second option. 23. The Parties present endorsed the concept of allowing the United States and France to accede the Niue Treaty. Agenda 6: Other Matters 26. Australia noted that the Pacific Plan Action Committee (PPAC) had recently considered the potential for new multilateral pacific regional arrangements and agreed that there was widespread support for such arrangements. PPAC endorsed the Forum Secretariat and FFA to work on options to take this forward. Closing 27. The meeting was closed by the Chairman.

3

Attachment A FIRST MEETING OF THE PARTIES TO THE NIUE TREATY ON CO-OPERATION ON FISHERIES SURVEILLANCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC REGION

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Australia Mr Sanaila Naqali Ms Lara Santana Director Senior Policy Officer Fisheries Department Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and [email protected] Forestry [email protected] Mr Anare Raiwalui Mr Wez Norris Principle Fisheries Officer Manager Fisheries Department Australian Fisheries Management Authority Ministry of Fisheries, Forestry & Agriculture [email protected] [email protected]

Ms Nicole Flint Senior Management Officer Kiribati Australian Fisheries Management Authority [email protected] Mr Kintoba Tearo Principle Fisheries Officer Oceanic Fisheries Program Cook Islands [email protected]

Mr Ian Bertram Mr Takuia Uakeia Secretary Deputy Secretary Ministry of Marine Resources Ministry of Fisheries & Marine Resources [email protected] Development [email protected] Mr John Navin MSA Nauru Ministry of Marine Resources [email protected] Mr Terry Amram Nauru Fisheries & Marine Resources Authority Aiwo District, Nauru Island Federated States of Micronesia [email protected]

Mr Bernard Thoulag Mr Darryl Tom Executive Director Nauru Fisheries & Marine Resources Authority NORMA Aiwo District, Nauru Island [email protected] [email protected]

Fiji New Zealand

David Marx

4 Senior International Adviser Dr Sione V. Matoto Ministry of Fisheries Director of Fisheries [email protected] Ministry of Fisheries [email protected]

Palau Mr Ulunga Fa’aannu Secretary Ms Nannette Malsol Ministry of Fisheries National Focal Point [email protected] Bureau of Fisheries [email protected] Tuvalu Ms Kathleen Sisior Bureau of Fisheries Mr Samasoni Finikaso [email protected] Director Fisheries Department [email protected] Papua New Guinea

Mr Ludwig Kumoru Vanuatu Manager-Tuna National Fisheries Authority Mr William Naviti [email protected] Principal Compliance Officer Fisheries Department Mr Augustine Morbiha [email protected] National Fisheries Authority [email protected] Ms Beverleigh Kanas Assistant Compliance Officer Fisheries Department Samoa [email protected]

Mr. Atonio Mulipola CEO (Acting) FFA Secretariat Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries [email protected] Dr Transform Aqorau Deputy Director-General Mr.Ueta Faasi Jr [email protected] Senior Fisheries Officer Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries Mr Michael Ferris [email protected] Director, Fisheries Operations [email protected] Solomon Islands Ms Jean Gordon Mr Simon Alekera Legal Officer Chief Fisheries Officer [email protected] Ministry of Fisheries [email protected] Mr Moses Amos Director, Fisheries Management Mr. Fred Aleziru [email protected] Fisheries Officer Ministry of Fisheries Mr. Apolosi Turaganivalu , Solomon Islands Compliance Policy Officer [email protected] [email protected]

Tonga Mr. Kaburoro Ruaia Multilateral Treaties Manager

5 [email protected]

Mr. Anton Jimwereiy PNA Coordinator [email protected]

6