CFFA comments on the European Commission roadmap on a possible negotiation for a new fisheries agreement between the EU and the Republic of Guinea, which would grant access to European vessels in the Guinean EEZ, and underscores the key challenges local artisanal fisheries are facing
The European Commission has launched a roadmap inviting stakeholders to provide their views on a possible negotiation for a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement (SFPA) between the EU and the Republic of Guinea. The roadmap does not prejudge whether the initiative will be pursued or on its final content and establishes five goals for a new SFPA and protocol: environmental sustainability, access to the Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ) for the EU fleet, support to the local fisheries sector, the fight against IUU and improving scientific and technical knowledge.
For CFFA, in a potential future negotiation for an SFPA with Guinea, the EU should make sure it contributes towards resource and environmental sustainability, and that it supports the development of the local fisheries sector. In the current climate of political tension in this West African country, it is essential that local fisheries stakeholders’ voices are unimpeded so they can address some sensitive issues, such as transparency and the fight against IUU fishing. The EU should ensure that artisanal fisheries activities are not encroached on, particularly by coastal trawlers, so that both coastal communities’ livelihoods and food security for the population are guaranteed. For this reason, and also because of lack of reliable scientific data on coastal fisheries, let alone the existence of a surplus, the EU fleets should access tuna species only.
1. The tense political situation: SFPAs should have a stronger human rights clause
On 22 March 2020, in the middle of Coronavirus pandemic, Guinean citizens went to vote in a climate of violence and tension and under the critical look of the international community. The International Organisation of La Francophonie (OIF), ECOWAS and the African Union had repeatedly insisted on the need for free, transparent and inclusive elections, and the latter cancelled its observation mission at the end of February 2020. Several human rights NGOs, including Amnesty International, denounced the repression against opposition leaders, and criticized the “cost in terms of human rights” of “a constitutional reform that could allow the President to stay in power.” The European Union condemned the violence and disproportionate use of force by law enforcement officials on election day and stated that “the non-inclusive and non-consensual nature of the ballots and of the electoral register undermines the credibility of the elections.”
Taking into account the tense political situation in Guinea, in the event of the start of negotiations for an SFPA, it is imperative that the EU, in cooperation with Guinea, ensures the terms and conditions for good governance and sustainability set out in the Cotonou Agreement and in the future EU-Africa Strategy. In this regard, the EU should consider having a stronger human rights clause, allowing the Agreement to be denounced in case of a breach of universal rights, including the right to food.
2. Contributing towards resource and environmental sustainability:
2.1. Clarifying some unclear aspects in the fisheries management national
A future SFPA between the EU and Guinea should be in line with and contribute to the goals that Guinea has for the sustainable development of its local fisheries sector. These goals can be found in Guinea 2020 fisheries management plan:
To preserve fisheries resources on the long term
Improve the fish contribution to food security
Improve fisheries’ contribution to employment
Increase the economic benefits from fisheries
Guinea has signed the Convention on Minimal Access Conditions (CMA) of the SRFC, which insists on the precautionary approach in the management of resources. In the context of potential future negotiations, this precautionary approach needs to be followed, especially bearing in mind the lack of scientific data on the state of the fish stocks, data which is either non-existing or obsolete, and considering that several aspects in the 2020 fisheries management plan which remain unclear. For example:
Nationality of fishing vessels: there is a category (« navires basés ») which includes foreign vessels operating in Guinean waters with landing obligations in Guinea. However, under article 14 of the fisheries code, chartering agreements for fishing vessels are not permitted. These ‘based’ vessels are allowed to benefit from a certain priority of access to resources without clearly defined conditions (article 59 of the fisheries code). This status is ambiguous and does not contribute to the sustainable exploitation of resources in Guinea’s EEZ.
Vessel tonnage: For the calculation, the 2020 plan treats indiscriminately GT and GRT which are two different measure systems. This is confusing, especially taking into account that Chinese vessels have been massively under declaring their tonnage in Guinea.
TACs (Total Allowable Catch): Guinea has made increasing efforts to allocate resource access via TACs, however, it is unclear how these TACs are calculated.
Small pelagics: The plan is also unclear about the types of fisheries licences. For example, it talks about licences for ‘pelagic fisheries’, but does not specify if these are licences for small pelagics or for tuna species. Further in the plan, ‘tuna fisheries’ licences are mentioned though this category does not appear as a type of licence.
These aspects would need to be clarified before the EU fleets access fisheries resources in Guinean waters.
2.2. Continuing efforts of transparency
On the other hand, it is important to remind that since 2016, Guinea has taken some commitments with regards to transparency in the fisheries sector, especially through the Fisheries Transparency Initiative (FiTI). These commitments and progress made in transparency should be welcomed, especially the annual publication of the list of vessels which have a licence to fish in Guinea and the breakdown by fisheries of the fees perceived by the Ministry of Fisheries, Aquaculture and Maritime Economy (MPAEM). Transparency in all the aspects of fisheries management should be a key concern in potential future negotiations.
3. EU long distance fleet access: tuna only
Several European vessels have already been operating in Guinea’s EEZ with private licences, such as French and Spanish tuna fleet and several shrimp and demersal Spanish and Italian trawlers.
Signing an SFPA with the EU covering tuna fleets access would allow Guinea to derive better economic benefits from the tuna resources passing through its EEZ, and would improve how the presence of this fleet is monitored by both parties.
Regarding an access to more coastal species, in the current state of Guinea’s lack of Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) and scientific research capacity, including lack of well trained and well remunerated human resources, and in the absence of data, having an SFPA that allows shrimp or demersal trawlers access, would not fulfil the aim of promoting sustainable fisheries as required by the European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Further to that, it would put these vessels in competition with local artisanal fishers, who depend upon these coastal fisheries for their livelihoods. The roadmap itself says “SFPAs generally authorise EU vessels to fish outside 12 miles of the shore (territorial waters)” (page 2, on top of the page).
In this regard, we are surprised that these EU trawlers, including Italian vessels involved in IUU fishing operations in West Africa, managed to prove the sustainability of their activities and received a fishing authorization in 2019. Indeed, according to articles 17 and 18 of the SMEFF regulation, the operator needs to provide a scientific evaluation demonstrating the sustainability of the planned fishing operations to the flag Member State to obtain a fishing authorization.
“1. A flag Member State may only issue a fishing authorisation for fishing operations carried out in third-country waters outside the framework of an agreement referred to in Section 1 or 2 if:
[...]
(c) the operator has provided each of the following:
[...]
— a scientific evaluation demonstrating the sustainability of the planned fishing operations, including consistency with the provisions of Article 62 of UNCLOS, as applicable,”
4. Contributing to fight against IUU fishing:
IUU is a critical issue in terms of sustainability and livelihoods since illegal activities in the coastal areas encroach on zones and resources also used by the artisanal sector. IUU fishing also affects the level playing field between the various fleets operating in Guinean waters. The fight against IUU should therefore be an essential element of all future SFPA, especially through the strengthening of MCS capacities.
Local sources have informed of recent (Asian) trawlers incursions in the artisanal fisheries zone in the region of Kamsar (North). These trawlers often lose their nets and sometimes collide with artisanal pirogues. The surveillance authorities allegedly say they do not have the means to stop them and without the identification of the vessels, artisanal fishermen are not entitled to any compensation for the damages.
Guinea's fisheries code emphasizes participatory surveillance as an element of fisheries co-management.
It should also be noted that several vessels from the Chinese company LIAN RUN received a licence in 2019. This company has repeatedly been cited in NGO reports on IUU fishing in Guinea since 2006. Furthermore, the vessels which obtained a licence in 2019 had been charged with illegal fishing in 2018 and the Chinese authorities withdrew their fishing authorization. The fact that these actors are still present in the Guinean industrial fisheries suggest that the problem of bad governance goes beyond the lack of capacity of Guinea to control its EEZ.
In fact, the continuation of this illegal fishing is difficult to understand in the context of the “intense follow-up” of the IUU dialogue between the EU and Guinea after the lifting of its ‘red card’ in 2016. It is crucial to reinforce, in the case of future negotiations, the determination and political will of Guinea in the fight against IUU fishing.
“Under the IUU Regulation, non-EU countries identified as having inadequate measures in place to prevent and deter IUU fishing are issued with a formal warning (yellow card) to improve. If they fail to do so, they face having their fish banned from the EU market (red card) among other measures. ”
5. How to use the Sectoral support most efficiently: research, MCS, support to fishing communities
Considering all the points mentioned above, sectoral support should be used to improve scientific research as well as MCS capacities, especially because in 2015 Guinea’s EEZ increased significantly.
First, regarding scientific research, there is a clear lack of scientific data on the state of fish stocks in Guinean waters. Whereas Guinea has signed the CMA convention of the SRFC, it is unclear how the fisheries management plan integrates the precautionary approach to manage Guinean resources. Improving research capacities is therefore vital.
On MCS capacities, the fisheries code (see article 21 of Section 2) mentions the development of participatory surveillance as an essential element of co-management. In the early 2000s, a pilot participatory surveillance project was launched in the northern part of the coast, where some fishermen communicated directly with the authorities using radios and GPS.[2] The project resulted in fishers living conditions improved and in a 60% reduction of illegal activities, in particular in the fishing zone reserved for artisanal fishermen. Unfortunately, this project was neither extended to the rest of the country, nor perpetuated, as was the demand of coastal communities.
The Covid-19 crisis had a major impact on fish processing and distribution chains. Djeinab Camara had to sleep on site at the processing site in Teminetaye (Conakry) because it could no longer afford the cost of transport home.
Special attention should be also given to the needs of women fish processors, as they are a vital component in the fish value chain’s contribution to food security. They work in dire conditions and are in a precarious situation, heavily impacted by the recent measures implemented to fight the spreading of Covid-19. These women are often forced to sleep on the processing sites because they cannot afford the price of transport and some have been selling their products at loss.
LAND RIGHTS: The case of the port of Kouléwondy
In some cases, the situation of coastal communities goes beyond poor working conditions, and points to governance issues. For example, early December 2019, a fishing community was forcefully evicted from a landing and processing site in Conakry and their hangar destroyed by bulldozers because of a lease of the land by the government to a luxury hotel. As we denounced at the time, this eviction goes against the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Small-scale Fisheries and the Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the context of food security to which Guinea subscribes. Even though a compensation and an alternative site was promised to the women fish processors and the minister responded to our complaint letter assuring us of his will to accompany the community “according to the international obligations,” to date and according to local sources, the women continue to smoke the fish on the evicted land, braving the sun and rain to provide for their daily needs.
Finally, the participation of all local fisheries stakeholders is a key aspect for a good implementation of an SFPA, including in the use of sectoral funds. As mentioned in the introduction, there is currently a tense political situation in Guinea, a context that could hinder civil society from speaking openly and getting involved in essential, but sensitive issues, such as transparency or IUU fishing. As a first step, civil society should be included in the decision-making and implementation of projects to be financed by sectoral support. In Guinea, not only there are several local fisheries organisations (fishermen, women fish processors, support organisations…) but also, early 2020, a platform of non-state fisheries actors was created with the support of the African Union, in partnership with ECOWAS and the EU (PESCAO). This platform is recognized both by the actors and the administration, and the inclusion of such a stakeholder in the process would allow to start a wider social dialogue to promote sustainable fisheries in the framework of EU-Guinea relations.
Photos: Mamadou Aliou Diallo.
According to a decree from December 2021, the so-called "advanced artisanal" fishery that local stakeholders complain about is now officially called "semi-industrial" and is reserved exclusively for Guinean fishermen.