Combatting Tax crime and oTher crimes

in the Fisheries seCtor

13 october 2016

Key findings and discussion summary

03

Photo By: rich carey / shutterstock.com

image iD:72467971inTer-agency co-oPeraTion | Fisheries & Crime

Photo By: albert Pego / shutterstock.com

The participants of the conference represented diverse stakeholders, including: fisheries and tax administrations, competent authorities and various enforcement agencies of member countries, along with intergovernmental organisations and non-governmental organisations.

during the two-day conference, the participants shared challenges, best practices and identified the necessary steps to better fight tax crimes and other crimes in the fisheries sector.

The main conclusions from the meeting were to:

strengthen anD enForCe legislation• establishing a strong legal framework is key, which

includes fisheries law and relevant regulations, criminal codes, tax legislation, anti-corruption law, labour laws, and organised crime laws. effective enforcement through these different types of laws will undermine various criminal business models affecting the fisheries sector. The framework will have to reflect the state’s responsibilities as a flag state, coastal state, market state or port state and for their own nationals.

• gaps in existing legislation allow exploitation by illegal actors. crimes can occur at every part of the value chain from fishing boat to consumer. all sector participants can help by building transparency into their operations to identify where crimes are likely to occur.

• due to the diverse parties along the value chain and active international trade of fish and fishery products, measures must be tailored to the particular legal powers, procedures and governance capacity of countries.

builD anD improve inter-agenCy Cooperation• There is no single authority that has the comprehensive

mandate to oversee and combat the full spectrum of activities associated with fisheries related crimes. Fighting these crimes will require strong cooperation, between police, prosecutors and fisheries managers within a country and across countries to tackle the increasing transnational nature of such crimes.

• having established frameworks that act as an umbrella for cooperation can facilitate monitoring, control and enforcement activities and thus reduce the costs of working across borders to combat fisheries related crimes. investigating fisheries violations or other

crimes affecting the fisheries sector is critical, but prosecution could be time-consuming and expensive.

• different jurisdictions and agencies collect data that could assist ongoing investigations, but often lack the mandate to share it. Participants highlighted the value of promoting the exchange of relevant data and information through a common framework.

Work With anD reCeive support From international organisations

• Partnerships across organisations - such as the oecd, the Fao, the Unodc, the Wco, inTerPoL and rFmos - can help build and strengthen the required international cooperation and governance frameworks.

• This will build on existing measures to fight illegal, unreported and unregulated (iUU) fishing and fisheries related crimes, such as the Fao agreement on Port state measures agreement, the Un convention against Transnational organized crime; and the oecd’s work on best policy practices.

involve stakeholDers

• Private sector actors, such as seafood processors or financial service providers, should take greater responsibility to ensure that their activities do not facilitate criminal activity.

inCrease aWareness anD unDerstanDing• Political will at the highest level significantly contributes

to the fight against crimes in the fisheries sector. moving this issue up the political agenda will help increase the awareness of the damage caused and costs associated to fisheries-related crimes.

• Best practices and lessons can be learned from other countries’ experiences, as well as from the experience gained addressing other forms of environmental crime.

• investments in improved training and increased resources for investigations are needed to build capacity to fight tax crime and other crimes in the fisheries sector.

ConFerenCe FinDings

2Fisheries & Crime | conFerence Findings

unDerstanDing Crime in The Fisheries secTor

UndersTanding crime | Fisheries & Crime3

antonia leroy, natural resourCes poliCy, traDe anD agriCulture DireCtorate, oeCDPresentation: iUU fishing and related economic crimes, what are the current issues?

• While fisheries crime is not equivalent to iUU fishing, the United general assembly recognises that iUU fishing intersects with a wide range of other crimes. These include human trafficking, drug smuggling, corruption and tax fraud and even occasionally terrorism financing.

• eliminating iUU fishing is an international goal, as recognised by the United nations sustainable developments goal (sdg) 14.4, which specifically calls for an end to iUU fishing. ending iUU fishing also intersects with other sdgs, including those that aim to eradicate poverty, end hunger and improve institutions.

• iUU fishing is an economic crime with a financial motivation. illicit funds can move between countries, depending on the quality of national regulations and their implementation. investigating the underlying economic crimes related to fisheries crimes ¬– such as money laundering, corruption, tax crimes and illicit financial flows – can serve as powerful deterrent.

• Financial investigations should be part of an overall crime strategy developed in cooperation with fisheries authorities. investigators should

follow the money to find the real organisers, the beneficial owner and their networks, as workers lower down in the network can simply be replaced if caught. These financial investigations can provide critical evidence regarding iUU fishing operations.

• The oecd already supports its members on issues related to economic and financial crime through numerous initiatives and instruments such as the oecd Tax force against Tax crimes, the oecd anti-bribery convention and the Financial action Task Force. Though these do not explicitly address iUU fishing or fisheries associated crimes, there is significant potential for them to assist in addressing the problem. international and inter-agency cooperation would help to monitor progress and facilitate co-ordinated action among countries.

Jorge eDuarDo rios, ChieF, global programme For Combating WilDliFe anD Forest Crime, uniteD nations oFFiCe on Drugs anD Crime, unoDC Presentation: other serious crimes in the fisheries sector - how can the Unodc act with a “crime” mandate?

• The Unodc has two main instruments to fight crime in the fisheries sectors: the United nations convention against Transnational organized crime and the Protocols Thereto (UnToc) and the United nations convention against corruption. The Unodc established three main entry points

Photo By: Bennyartist / shutterstock.com

4Fisheries & Crime | UndersTanding crime

for transnational organised crime which are:

• document and identity fraud, including: document fraud and forgery, flag hopping or identity fraud, insurance fraud, and food hygiene regulation fraud and customs fraud

• economic crime, including: corruption, money laundering, and tax fraud

• Trafficking and other offences, including: human trafficking, human rights abuses, illicit trafficking of drugs, and racketeering and organised crime

• in many cases, the perceived and actual risks of being caught are low, those caught face relatively low penalties, and a significant amount of time is required for prosecution.

• reviews into existing legal and policy frameworks by Unodc have indicated that these frameworks are often outdated and unable to address transnational organised crime. The full force of the law is required to combat fisheries crimes. existing laws need to be reviewed and reformed, and greater emphasis needs to be placed on increasing public awareness. meanwhile, agencies need to collaborate on monitoring and enforcement, to share data among themselves, and to enhance their capacity and their technical skills.

Juergen leske, task ForCe on tax Crime anD other Crimes, oeCDPresentation: Tax crime in the fisheries sector – where are the risks?

• Weaknesses along the entire supply and value chain of the global fisheries sector present opportunities for operators to evade tax payments

or benefit financially from criminal activity. These include: when preparing and setting to sea by the fishing vessel, when selling fish and more generally in companies’ management and accounting.

• a lack of familiarity with fish documentation is a problem when combatting tax crime. resolving this will require training and capacity building to improve knowledge and awareness of the industry, the promotion of voluntary compliance, and intelligence sharing. a whole-of-government approach and international coordination can support these efforts.

roux raath, WorlD Customs organization Presentation: a border perspective - The role of customs in combatting illegal fishing

• The importance of fisheries has been increasing for the Wco: in 2012, the Wco launched an environmental Programme to combat environmental crime and, in 2014, it adopted the Wco declaration on illegal Wildlife Trade. These initiatives both incorporate fisheries crimes. The focus of customs authorities is to facilitate legal trade and intercept illegal trade in wildlife, including iUU fishing. By controlling the supply chain, the profitability of criminal activities is reduced. customs are ideally situated at a strategic point in the supply chain (i.e. at borders through which all goods must flow) and this position must be used to law enforcement’s advantage.

• The range and complexity of fish products and lack of timely documentation create issues. in addition, increasing actions by customs agents requires great public expenditure. The Wco

a range of authorities are involved throughout the value chain of the fisheries sec-tor (source: oecd)

5

has tools and instruments to gather and share information. however, better partnerships among various authorities can assist with making supply chains more resilient to crime. increasing training – in areas such as product identification, risk management and intelligence, detection and investigation – and to enhance general awareness among customs officials are key elements to fight fisheries crime. Political will is also needed, as well as the development of appropriate government policies. The Wco can assist with the training of frontline officers.

lori Curtis, FooD anD agriCulture organization oF the un

Presentation: entry into force of agreement on Port state measures to Prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing - what it changes?

• iUU takes advantage of limitations and weaknesses in administrative systems. iUU fishing is not always considered as a transnational crime, but rather a management violation requiring only administrative sanctions. however, vessels engaged in iUU fishing are sometimes engaged in other transnational crimes. The Fao developed an international framework to manage fisheries internationally (both binding and non-binding) among which is the agreement on Port state measures to Prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Psma), which recently entered into force.

• For the Psma to be effective, parties need to develop implementation strategies that are supported by

effective policy, legal and institutional frameworks, as well as operational mechanisms sustained by sufficient human and financial resources.

• The Psma will provide opportunities to strengthen information exchange regarding to fishing capacity, monitoring, and control and surveillance systems and therefore iUU fishing. The Psma creates a significantly more challenging environment for iUU vessels, particularly foreign ones. it encourages flag states to take their enforcement responsibilities against iUU fishing seriously. The Psma will be further strengthened when more parties join the agreement.

• The Fao’s work on capacity development to combat iUU fishing and the implementation of international legal instruments requires collaboration and cooperation at government level but also with other international organisations, rmFos and ngos.

alistair mCDonnell, interpol Presentation: role of inTerPoL/Project scale –what are the difficulties in investigating fisheries crime?

• Policy makers should not think that “it’s only fish”. For those involved, it is “money swimming around the sea”. The value of stolen fish and the related economic activities can be close to the amount developing countries’ spend on development.

• criminals pick the weakest jurisdictions. it is a complex issue because there are a number of jurisdictions and agencies involved in combatting fisheries crimes. There are often no notify authorities or points of contact in many countries. in a recent case, the investigation involved more than 35 cooperating countries. Work in progress

overview of the Psma require-ments and opera-tions (source: Fao)

UndersTanding crime | Fisheries & Crime

6Fisheries & Crime | UndersTanding crime

within interpol addresses the three layers as laid out in figure 2, as well as the regulatory layer. The transaction layer is where the value accrues to the different businesses. This figure is also an attempt to better understand where the data can be found.

• interpol can provide support for governments in mutual legal and administrative assistance. This could involve:

-developing regulatory partnerships (customs, port health, fisheries, port authorities, police);

-notifying official transnational points of contact (e.g. single -Liaison offices or national central Bureaus) for coordinating mutual assistance function;

-creating transparent and co-ordinated risk-managed relationships with the private sector.

-giving authorities the power to suspend importation whilst verification procedures are carried out with the flag state; and

-implementing an intelligence-led enforcement model

The layered supply chain shows were agencies can locate data (source: inTerPoL)

Country experienCes oF FighTing Fisheries crimes

coUnTry exPeriences | Fisheries & Crime7

greg sChneiDer, national oCeaniC anD atmospheriC aDministration (noaa) Presentation: The Presidential Task Force on combating iUU Fishing and seafood Fraud

• most fisheries violations are civil under Us lawand come under the magnuson-stevens act.infractions mainly lead to civil administrativepenalties. only a limited number of crimes requirecriminal penalties, as laid out in the Lacey act.Therefore most fisheries violations are consider civil with penalties imposed by fisheries managementorganisations. The requirements related to thelevel of proof needed for a conviction can vary.also, the perception of relative importanceof the crimes varies in different contexts.

• The recent Presidential Task Force on combatingiUU Fishing and seafood Fraud recommendeda range of measures, including internationalcooperation, the creation of inter-agencyframework, increased information sharing,and improved traceability. inter-agency co-operation during investigations, prosecutions,and judicial forfeitures request to select theright charges for prosecution and enables theflexibility to address a broad range of issues.

• inter-agency cooperation helps ensure themost serious violations are penalised. oneother major outcome of the PresidentialTask Force has reduced the administrativeburden involved in co-operation and improvedco-ordination between organisations.

• currently a traceability programme is beingdeveloped to determine the legality offish in the supply chain. This may help withthe investigation of tax evasion and crime.

eve De Coning, norWegian ministry oF traDe, inDustry anD Fisheries Presentation: combatting fisheries crime, the norwegian perspective

• it is important to recognise that iUU fishing andfisheries crime are separate concepts. norwayestablished the norwegian national advisory group against organised Fisheries crime and iUU Fishing,which includes all the relevant authorities along thevalue chain. What the norwegian national advisory group has learned is that one need to cooperateat operational level and one need to coordinate.

• agencies are not sufficiently aware of thesignificance of information they have. information

Photo By: Thor Jorgen Udvang / shutterstock.com

8Fisheries & Crime | coUnTry exPeriences

is not easily shared between agencies. This is not only a matter of trust. sometimes, there are reasons to do with sensitivity of the information. For instance, the presumption of innocence in the judicial process can prevent information about a suspect from being circulated. it is easier to share information in civil investigations than criminal one as criminal investigations have specific ways of gathering information so that it can be used by prosecutors. a policy problem exists particularly with regard to the allocation of resources and inter-agency working. cross-border co-operation is more delicate but important. norway is beginning to find ways to achieve this.

• norway believes international organisationscan support cross-border and inter-agencycooperation and co-ordination. examples includeinTerPoL and the Fisheries crime Workinggroup at the operational level. at the legal level,Unodc with the UnToc can assist countrieswith mutual legal assistance and encourage theharmonisation of laws so different countries havesimilar frameworks to work from. The Fao’s Psmaand the Flag state guidelines can assist countriesand be a source of information. The iLo’s Fishingconvention c188 can also provide some assistance. however, countries lack support at internationallevel for policy development assistance. howdo we cooperate and co-ordinate differentagencies? how do you work from inspection toinvestigation? There is a need to quantify resultsto be able to coordinating target and establishbest practices. The oecd’s whole-of-governmentapproach and expertise can play this role.

suyeon kim, ministry oF oCeans anD Fisheries, koreaPresentation: Korea’s experience on reinforcing the Fight against iUU Fishing

• in 2013, Korea took measures to combat iUUfishing. Four actions were taken in this direction:

- Korea implemented a legal and institutional framework by amending the dWFd act. Korea have changed the distribution structure to increase port control, banned on entry of alleged iUU catch into Korea market and better taken high risk areas into consideration. Korea also reinforced its vessel management system though a vessel decommissioning plan and national plan of inspection.

- The fisheries monitoring system was enhanced by improving monitoring tools and catch monitoring.

international cooperation created a network of rFmos, international organisations and countries to better share information.

- education and training programmes on iUU prevention and engagement with the industry

were delivered in relevant public bodies.

- Behind Korea’s progress lies four important points: strong commitment from the government: expanded international cooperation: the development of a fisheries monitoring system: and close engagement with the industry.

móniCa Corrales, spanish general seCretariat For Fisheries, spainPresentation: spanish policy to fight iUU fishing: enhancing international cooperation and strong legal framework

• spain has committed to fight iUU and to movetowards sdg 14.4; its actions are based on a strong legal framework and international co-operation.

• in december 2014, spain established a newlegal framework with the amendment of thespanish Fisheries Law 3/2001. spain soughtto address the problem of spanish nationalscommitting fish crimes with impunity. inthis context, the scope of the new law has:

- strengthened oversight of the market and inspection,

dissuaded spanish nationals from performing iUU fishing activities

- reinforced inspection services with domiciliary registrations under legal warrant

- strengthened the enforcement system by increasing sanctions

- introduced a specific “very serious infringement” for iUU fishing, for which the penalties are fines, disqualification and of the removal of subsidies from the vessels engaged in such activities

• spanish action has been held back by theneed to gather evidence to prove criminalactivities took place. The best solution to thisis greater international cooperation. indeed,mutual assistance is needed to gather relevantinformation on those involved in iUU fishing, aswell as the companies that own iUU vessels.The sharing of information can be facilitatedby memoranda of understanding which havebeen developed by the spanish governmentand used to underpin work with partners.

• more co-ordination between organisations isneeded. however, it is necessary to avoid overlap in following prosecutions. confidentiality issueshave historically been a limitation when trying toinvestigate financial crimes. additionally the speed with which money can be moved internationallyis a problem in fighting fisheries crime.

9

sebastian Wegner, Fisheries transparenCy initiative (Fiti)Presentation: Transparency as a tool in combating fisheries crimes

• The Fisheries Transparency initiative (FiTi) is a global multi-stakeholder initiative, which aims to enhanceresponsible fisheries through better transparencyand participation. it is a voluntary country-centred initiative with mandatory requirementsfor member countries. To improve transparency, FiTi countries will publish regular information on“access to marine fisheries”. This includes who hasthe right to fish, how much is paid for the right tofish and how much fish is extracted. other relevantsector information, including rights allocation,post-harvest and trade data is also essential.

• This initiative is self-reinforcing, in that enhancedtransparency encourages increased politicalwill and demonstrates good practices. Theinitiative is currently in its conceptual phaseto develop a global transparency standardon access to fisheries (FiTi standard)together with international advisory group.

• There is a public commitment by four pilot-countries - indonesia, mauritania, senegal and theseychelles - to initiate a multi-stakeholder process in their countries this year. The commitments were established at the first FiTi conference which tookplace in nouakchott / mauritania on 3 February,2016 (see nouakchott declaration of the FiTi).

• The FiTi standard is planned to be adopted at the2nd international FiTi conference which will takeplace in Bali / indonesia on 27 april 2017, hostedby the government of indonesia. The conference

will mark the transition from the conceptual phase to the implementation phase where committed countries start to implement the FiTi standard.

CommanDer abigail braDshaW, minister-Counsellor immigration anD borDer proteCtion, regional DireCtor europe, australiaPresentation: illegal Foreign Fishing. challenges and opportunities - australia’s policy and operational approach

• iUU fishing leads to maritime organised crime.australia views iUU fishing vessels as engines forother crimes such as drugs and human trafficking.different crimes can have the same modusoperandi. For instance, flags of convenience aresometimes also exploited by terrorist groups.Flag of convenience and non-transparencyis the main problem in fisheries crime. Flag ofconvenience vessels operate near australianborders outside the 200 nautical miles limit.many of these are registered to states that arenot signatories to international agreements.

• in addition to the limits of the law, australia maynot have the full capacity to fight all fisheries crimes given the limited time and capacity to manage itswaters. in this context, authorities use the australian maritime identification system to identify high riskactivities, in particular according to whether thecrimes pose a security threat. australia is opento new methods to tackle iUU fishing but is not infavour of duplicating existing efforts and measures.

Theory of change in fisheries govern-ance (source: FiTi)

coUnTry exPeriences | Fisheries & Crime

10Fisheries & Crime | coUnTry exPeriences

Dr mas aChmaD santosa, presiDential task ForCe to Combat illegal Fishing, inDonesiaPresentation: The fight against fisheries related and associated crimes in indonesia

• combating iUU fishing and associated crimerequires strong and genuine political will.indonesia strengthened law enforcement byimposing administrative sanctions; it revoked291 licenses, suspended of 261 licenses andsent 48 warning letters to fisheries companies.indonesia has also applied corporate criminalliability and a multi-legal regime approach withthe establishment of a Presidential Task Force(Task Force 115) to combat fisheries crime,termed the “one-roof enforcement system”.

• With the aim to strengthen sovereignty and‘maritime power’, indonesia is also reviewingthe process of licencing for foreign vessels andimposing limitations on activities, e.g. preventing

transhipment, and improved governance in the fishing business. a breakthrough is needed to improve the ability to detect, respond, and punish illegal fishing vessels. corporate criminal liability and a multi-legal regime (multi-pronged approach) need to be applied to provide a more effective deterrent. it would be enhanced by integrated data platform, bilateral cooperation on export and import data and strong sanctions against non-compliant actors.

Types of viola-tions of fish-eries crimes in indonesia (source: Presidential Task Force to comat illegal Fishing)

imProving inter-agenCy anD Cross-Country co-oPeraTion

imProving co-oPeraTion | Fisheries & Crime11

hans tetmo, Chair, north sea Fisheries intelligenCe group, north atlantiC Fisheries intelligenCe group (na-Fig) Presentation: understanding the role of tax agencies and information exchanges in combating crime in the fisheries sector

• na-Fig is an initiative that develops inter-agency cooperation at the regional level. na-Fig member authorities include tax administrations, customs administrations, fisheries authorities and other relevant authorities or agencies with interests in the fisheries sector. This initiative established a network of experts and intelligence analysts with the aim of enhancing capacity-building by providing training for intelligence-based cooperation and sharing of information. na-Fig uses existing international agreements and protocols to share information and intelligence. all member agencies abide by the formal procedures that exist within their area of responsibility.

• na-Fig works in cooperation with interpol to examine how secrecy is used to evade taxes and fisheries regulation. na-Fig proposed that authorities inspect fisheries should recognize the importance of book-keeping records, and be aware of the potential found investigating

the financial aspects of an offence. This can make it easier to prove a crime took place. an important challenge for inter-agency cooperation is the lack of clear authority to report crimes to other agencies nationally and internationally.

paWel sWiDerek, Deputy heaD oF unit For Fisheries Control poliCy, DireCtorate general For maritime aFFairs anD Fisheries, european unionPresentation: the eU cooperation with member states and third countries in the fight against iUU fishing and its linked crimes

• The eU is the world’s largest importer of fisheries products. With the corresponding market state responsibilities it is essential for the eU to ensure traceability in the whole chain – from net to plate – of all fishery products traded with the eU.

• The main objective of the eU’s iUU policy is to ensure the proper fulfilment of international law and the laws and regulations of states, including international conservation and management measures. The eU has developed a mutual assistance system with a cooperative tool aimed to facilitate the systematic exchange of information between the european commission and eU member states,

Photo By: samjaw / shutterstock.com

12Fisheries & Crime | imProving co-oPeraTion

as well as with third countries and other actors.

• since the implementation of the eU policy the following have been observed:

- tangible results related to the improvement of fisheries management systems,

- more effective control of fisheries with countries that revised legislation,

- tougher sanctions,

- greater political commitment,

- better traceability throughout the supply chain, and

- the improvement of regional cooperation between coastal, port and flag states.

abDellah srour, exeCutive seCretary, general Fisheries Commission For the meDiterranean (gFCm-Fao)Presentation: how can regional Fisheries management organisations (rmFos) support countries in the fight against fisheries crimes?

• The gFcm has taken various deterrent actions against iUU fishing since the guidelines on compliance and enforcement were put into force in 2005 and the 2008 Psm. 2008 Psm recommendation was aligned with the text of the Fao’s -Psma. in addition, the gFcm contributes to vessel lists and publicise these. in the mid-term strategy (2017-2020) that works towards the sustainability of mediterranean and Black sea fisheries, the gFcm established a clear target to curb iUU fishing. This first requires the regular quantification of iUU fishing in the mediterranean and the Black sea. second, work to harmonise existing measures involved in the fight against iUU fishing is needed. Lastly, countries need to reinforce inspection procedures within the framework of port state control and continue their efforts to operationalise a regional vms and control system.

• in the mediterranean the comparison of sales to fishing trips where more trips than sales are observed suggest that activities other than fishing are taking place on board fishing vessels. To raise awareness, the gFcm will establish an international day for the fight against iUU fishing in 2017. emerging issues such as fisheries crimes imply the need to work with competent partners that are capable of steering the programme of the mid-term strategy.

Wez norris, paCiFiC islanDs Forum Fisheries agenCy (FFa)Presentation: cooperative instruments for surveillance and enforcement

• The FFa parties signed the niue Treaty to reinforce a “data sharing matrix” to develop a legal framework to combat fisheries crimes. This gave

the FFa the mandate to use operational tools, which provide co-operation on monitoring, control and surveillance systems such as pacific patrol boats, FFa good standing register, observers and quadrilateral defence providers. With these tools and analysis of transhipment, illegal activities such as the transhipment of drugs can be identified. The FFa is currently unable to act on this kind of observation as its mandate is limited to fisheries.

• The data collected by the FFa cannot always immediately lead to a control action, but tracking vessels can help ensure enforcement actions are taken at a later date. having a range of tools is important; a register of good standing is one way that vessels can be incentivised to adhere to rules or else lose access to fishing grounds.

• some organisations such as the FFa share information within the region on monitoring, control and surveillance, and have a great deal of data that is of potential value for enforcement. nevertheless, current limitations do not allow sharing this information with other countries.

JessiCa battle, global oCean poliCy manager, WWFPresentation: Being the change: implementing the recommendations of the joint Unodc/WWF expert group meeting on Fisheries crime

• it is necessary to harness political will to move towards the sdgs and give fisheries crimes and fisheries issues high priority in the political agenda. The Unodc/WWF expert group meeting in February 2016 submitted 10 recommendations to the United nations commission on crime. These recommendations should be translated into clear actions by states and definitions of the mandates for each agency.

• The Unodc/WWF report to the commission on crime defines “fisheries crime” as a broad concept that spans not only the on-the-water predicate crimes in breach of fisheries legislation but also the full suite of offences in breach of a broad suite of other legislation covering issues such as corruption, safety at sea, people trafficking, document fraud, and money laundering. a critical law reform issue is to ensure that other legislation covering predicate offences in these other areas explicitly recognises cross-over crimes from the fisheries area. subsequent to the expert group meeting, an idea that a number of people found interesting was to create an offense of “the illegal use of a fishing vessel”. This could be for addressing crimes such as trafficking in drugs, persons and weapons, but also breach of regulations regarding vessel safety and crew conditions, as well as failure to disclose beneficial ownership and fisheries management offences. This could

13 Fisheries & Crime | imProving co-oPeraTion

also simplify the task of inter-agency cooperation.

• To drive law reform and assist in mutual legal assistance a resolution at 2017’s crime commission meeting could be helpful. This could set up the scope of the conditions as a soft law commitment and further elaborate a check list states can use while updating legislations.

• The difficulty in the fight against fisheries crimes is to catch the real perpetuator due to the complex structure of the industry and the disjointed and insufficient government response. identifying beneficial owners is key.

Dana miller, marine sCientist, oCeana Presentation: marine insurance and illegal, unreported, and unregulated (iUU) fishing

• The finding of researchers at the University of British columbia is that iUU fishing vessels most often have access to insurance and that operators use insurance to support their illegal activities. For vessels that are under investigation, the study found that most of them were insured. however, insurance companies have data at their disposal that are not publicly available.

• in this context, oceana advises that insurers should be concerned about whether they are insuring vessels used for illegal purposes:

• The risk of legal jeopardy within some iUU fishing regulations means the provision of insurance can be considered as a serious infringement. The wording of regulations also needs to be strengthened.

• iUU fishing operations are a high risk profile activity.

• illegal activity puts their corporate social responsibility programmes and their reputations at risk. Building relationships with insurance companies has allowed some progress in this area as they do not want to be associated with illegal fishing. insurers should monitor companies to better assess risks.

kees lankester, DireCtor, sComber; sustainable seaFooD FinanCe initiativePresentation: credit lending and investment - the risk of financing iUU fishing

• The presentation focused on seafood credit lenders and investors, which is a different and important perspective. The sustainable seafood Finance initiative (ssF) developed a method for improving seafood investments. For this purpose, the language needs to be different in order to communicate with lenders and investors. Fishing activities do not exist without investments. in this context, ssF decided to focus on transnational companies and holdings of

fishing companies. investments flow in holdings, not in vessels or in fishing companies per se. This is about the beneficial owner, because these are shareholders or bank lenders. it is the one who have got the credit for these activities.

• ssF focuses on lenders because many large seafood companies are family owned and investors have minority shares. credit lending could have the bigger influence in tackling the financing of fisheries crimes activities. at present lenders are most concerned with human trafficking, being a hot topic of fisheries crimes. apart from credit risks, banks are also concerned about their reputations.

• Banks normally give credits to the parent companies, the holdings. The holding is the entire panorama of subsidiaries but also could include joint-ventures. When credit lenders better take into consideration the entire structure of the holding, they can better determine all seafood activities within a company and the associated risks. Without disclosing client information, a third party system could allow financial institutions to analyse client risks. sustainable seafood finance presented ideas to help banks to improve performance of their clients and classify risks. Transparency is key. There is a lot of ignorance about the investment in fisheries activities, hence in the associated risks.

• For many banks the interest in csr in their seafood portfolio is still limited, given the small size of the fisheries industry in the main banks portfolio compared to other industries. But accusations of links to illegal practices in fishing are considered an urgent matter of concern. The message of ssF is to move from absence of evidence to evidence of absence of illegal activities.

more information about oecd Fisheries can be found at http://www.oecd.org/tad/fisheries

This website contains links to our research reports and data you may find interesting.

Follow us on Twitter: @oecdagriculture

#fightfishcrime