...
In Mission, our toughest challenge has been finding a solution to one of the world's greatest problems, the oceans. To ensure that our solution reaches the highest pinnacles of government and society, we have developed an international forum for discussion, regulation, and innovation in the realm of marine ecosystem ecosystems and fisheries protection. Currently, the UN Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea governs codifies conventional international law (EarthTrust). The Law of the Sea, or LOS, has been supplemented by other legislation, including 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. It is our vision to call another UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Preservation of the Oceans. This Convention would concern the introduction of a new agreement (treaty) among nations to meet the following objectives as defined by Mission 2011: end overfishing, preserve marine ecosystems, and develop alternative measures to meet the nutritional needs of the international populace.
...
The Agreement for the Introduction of Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Preservation of the Oceans will include the aquaculture, marine protected area, climate and environment, fishery management, technology, plans for future research, and additional international cooperation aspects of our solution. Some examples of treaty specifics include:
...
To implement this Treaty, a Convention of the United Nations must be called, upon which time member states will discuss and debated debate the merits of the Treaty until a consensus can be reached, as occurred in the Third Convention of the Law of the Sea (Koh).
The Structure and Enforcement of the Treaty
Many regions of the world have regional fishing bodies (RFBs), which organize nations to work before a common goal of conserving fisheries. Although these groups have had limited success we would like to implement them into our plan with a significant change in their role. Currently RFBs have the ability to join the International Seabed Authority, under Part XI, Section 4, Article 156, and to sign the Law of the Sea, under Part XVII, Article 305 and Annex IX, Article 1, so to include them in the adoption of a new treaty can be considered already supported and lawful. RFBs are beneficial because they are much more specific than any single global organization. RFBS consist of a small number of countries that can better address their own regional issues, allowing for more efficient and precise decisions (Role of Regional Fishing Bodies, 1999).
At the moment there are 6 RFBs that are linked to the FAO, as well as many which are outside the discression of the FAO. This treaty calls for RFBs covering all portions of the ocean, under the discression of the FAO. This would be accomplished in one of two ways: additional RFBs could be created under the FAO to cover the regions not covered by the 6 existing ones, or existing non-FAO RFBs could be integrated to fill the positions. In any case, the purpose is to integrate more RFBs under a centralized purpose into the governing of the oceans (Role of RFBs, 1999).
RFBs, in general, have been ineffective in influencing the policies of their member states, despite the use of management and conservation "instruments" allocated by the UN Fish Stock Agreement. Therefore, any RFBs integrated through the treaty will be determined by the history of management practices and effectiveness. Otherwise we would advocate the creation of new RFBs.
These RFBs would follow the guidelines already set by the conventions requiring any member nations to provide monitoring and enforcement in their waters. These RFBs would then act to control their regions in a way similar to how the United States fisheries have been run. Each RFB will have a scientific committee - to create an annual report on the state of the location and to set annual catch limits for the member nations to follow - and an economic committee to assist each country with the implementation of the provisions of the treaty.
Regional Tribunals will correspond to the RFBs The structure of this Treaty calls for the introduction of Regional Assessment Councils (RAC), as well as Regional Tribunals. The RACs are comprised of marine scientists and economic advisors and serve the same purpose as the current Regional Fishing Bodies in use, but will hopefully be more effective. RACs are responsible for regions based on the following criteria:
(if they aren't then they can be party (if they sign LOS, if they dont they can be observers) under part XI, section 4, article 156, Part XVII, article 305, Annex 9, article 1. they can be a part of the LOS under Part XVII, article 305 and annex 9 article 1)
RACs assist countries with the implementation of the Treaty: the Treaty calls for several national measures to be taken, with guidelines for how these should come about. The RACs tailor the Treaty's provision to its member states' capabilities.
Regional Tribunals correspond to the RACs and will be an intermediary for the Tribunal established by LOS. The intention is for the Regional Tribunals to settle disputes more quickly and efficiently because boards will be more familiar with the region's conflicts. If a member chooses to appeal the Regional Tribunal's decision, or if a conflict is inter-regional, then the case will go the Tribunal.
The enforcement of this Treaty to deter IUU practices is two-fold: disputes and suspicions of illegal activity are settled through the Tribunal system, while international enforcement to deter IUU fishing is the responsibility of member states. This Treaty calls for the implementation of regulatory fleets (similar to the U.S. Coast Guard) to patrol the EEZ of a member State. The Treaty encourages the strict enforcement , - enabled by GPS tracking , - through boat confiscation and freezing of assets. On the high seas, it is any member State's responsibility to report illegal activity to the Tribunals of other member States. If a non-member is found to be defying the regulations outlines by this Treaty or other UN laws relating to the seas, then it is the responsibility of each member State to stop all commercial agreements with this party (as per the aforementioned provisions of the Treaty).
...
United Nations Division for Sustainable Development. (2004). Agenda 21, Chapter 34. Retrieved 21 November 21, 2007, from: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter34.htm.
International Whaling Commission. (2007). Scientific Permits. Retrieved 19 November 19, 2007, from: http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/permits.htm.
International Whaling Commission. (2007). Whale Population Estimates. Retrieved 19 November 19, 2007, from: http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm.
...
Koh, T.T.B. A Constitution for the Oceans. Retrieved 12 November 2007, from the UN Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm
.
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: An Initiative of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States of the U.S. Retrieved 16 November 16, 2007, from web site: http://www.rggi.org/index.htm.
EarthNet's "DriftNetwork" Program. International Law Governing Driftnet Fishing on the High Seas. Retrieved 16 November 2007, from the World Wide Web: http://www.earthtrust.org/dnpaper/intllaw.html.
Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. (10 December 1984). United Nations Convention on The Law of the Sea. Retrieved 12 November 2007, from: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm.
(1999). The Role of Regional Fishery Bodies in Conservation and Management of Resources. Food and Agriculture Organization. Retrieved 17 November 2007, from: http://www.fao.org/fi/website/MultiQueryAction.do?.