Malta’s position on the outcome of the Coreper (Part I) meeting of 10 March 2010 on the EU position on the listing of Bluefin Tuna as Appendix I species to the convention on international trade in endangered species.

During the meeting of the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Part I), the Committee decided in favour (through Qualified Majority Voting) of giving the European Union a mandate for voting in favour of the conditional listing of bluefin tuna as an Appendix I species during the meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to be held in Doha, Qatar on 13 – 25 March 2010. According to the rules of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the 27 EU Member States take a position as a single bloc in meetings of certain international organisations including CITES. A favourable vote of the 175 Members of CITES, in the CITES Conference of the Parties meeting, could bring about a ban on international trade of bluefin tuna.

Twenty-six Member States argued in favour of the inclusion of bluefin tuna in Appendix I. The EU will now be proposing that such inclusion should enter into force on a conditional basis, that is, pending an assessment of the state of the fish stocks by the scientific committee of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT).

Nevertheless, Malta continued to argue that the most effective governance model for regulating the fishery should continue to be the ICCAT, as a regional fisheries management organisation, and not CITES which is an international environmental agreement. In this context, Malta opposed the proposal for a CITES Appendix I listing.

It is pertinent to note that Member States’ opinions were sharply divided on the issue of what conditions should apply in the event of a trade ban as regards compensation for those affected and the continuation of artisanal fishing of bluefin tuna. Malta argued that a ban would have serious socio-economic implications for the Maltese traditional fisheries sector. At this stage there are not sufficient guarantees with regard to compensation from EU funds to those affected by a ban on international trade, including fishermen and farm operators. Malta insisted that any eventual compensation should not be paid out of the existing EU Fisheries funds but through a new budgetary allocation.

Under the proposed listing, Member States could continue to catch bluefin tuna only within the waters under their jurisdiction, which vary in size among different Member States which would not allow for equal fishing opportunities.



Statement by Malta in explanation of its vote at COREPER (Part I) on 10 March 2010 with regard to the proposed listing of bluefin tuna as Appendix I species to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

Malta reaffirms its position in support of the EU on the Proposal for a Council decision establishing the position of the European Union with regard to certain proposals submitted to the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP 15) to the Convention on International trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Doha, Qatar, 13-25 March 2010, with the exception of bluefin tuna.

Malta’s principal consideration is to ensure the sustainability of the stocks, and maintains that the most effective governance model for regulating the fishery should continue to be the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), as a regulatory fisheries management organisation and not the CITES.
The Proposal for a Council decision establishing the position of the European Union, would have serious, adverse socio-economic implications for Malta which are not justified by the objectives purported to be achieved by this Proposal for improvement of the bluefin tuna stocks.

Malta, therefore, is expressing a negative vote on this Council Decision.