Panama has been on my mind lately, as I heard rumours that the EU’s DG MARE is brewing a red card for them. Let's get clear that Panama is a flag of convenience / open registry (this article gives some further context on Panama)
124 more of these around… surprisingly no panamenians on board 🙄
Panama had a yellow card in 2012 (lifted in 2024) and the 2nd one in 2019, which didn’t focussed them at all… in fact, right now, I’m following a Panamian carrier we suspect of setting FADs (something they are not licenced to do and is double bad since we are in FAD closure in the WCPFC. Panama, as flag state is responsible, but no answer to queries
Carriers don do stuff like that twice in the same area with 5 months dfifference (and wasn’t weather is over 10kts avg speed)
The forte of Panama in the RFMOs is that it is the preferred flag for carriers and some longliners… but mostly carriers… 125 in the WCPFC alone to be precise.
So Let's imagine that Panama I indeed identified as a non-cooperative third country... among other reasons, due to the lack of control over their flag vessels, and ergo gets the “red card”
The usual reading of (EC) No. 1005/2008 is that fishery products caught by fishing vessels under the flag of the non-cooperative state do not have access to the EC as they could not provide catch certificates.
Now... nothing that 1005/2008 defines:
‘fishing vessel’ means any vessel of any size used or intended for use for the purposes of commercial exploitation of fishery resources, including support ships, fish processing vessels, vessels engaged in transhipment and carrier vessels equipped for the transportation of fishery products, except container vessels;
The declaration of "non-cooperating" to Panama would not affect the capture products of other "cooperating" states that are transshipped to Panamanian carriers.
Article 38 - Measures applicable to non-cooperating third countries only says in this regard:
1) the importation into the Community of fishery products caught by fishing vessels flying the flag of such countries shall be prohibited, and accordingly, catch certificates accompanying such products shall not be accepted.
Therefore, it reads NO effect since the catch certificate is issued by the flag state, and the carrier only acted as a transporter, despite falling under the definition of a fishing vessel.
The exciting thing here is that a Taiwanese or Chinese-owned vessel transshipping to a Panamanian would not be affected, but one owned by a Spanish or French national vessel would be, based on the same Article 38,
6) private trade arrangements between nationals of a Member State and such countries in order for a fishing vessel flying the flag of that Member State to use the fishing possibilities of such countries shall be prohibited;
A red that only affects the catches by Panamanian vessels would be a blow to some longliners, but the inclusion of carriers would make them immediately leave the Panamanian registry (I suppose they will go to the Liberian 🥺) and would wreck the WCPO tuna industry for a little while until all carriers are re-registered and so on...
In hindsight would be awesome that a red card means all fish that touch vessels with that flag become ineligible for the EU… but at present other than Panama losing face (not that they care)… no changes I’m afraid.