As is well known, I have a lifelong particular interest in labour rights in fisheries; this recent little interview by SPC tells a bit of the story… I came to the Pacific as a migrant fisherman, yet I was very lucky to have a postgraduate fishery qualification, and I’m partly of European ancestry, so the road was much easier for me than for most of my colleages.
Much of this interest consolidated during my time as a Rhodes Ocean Scholar. I learned a lot… and met some really clever young people, like Julia Cirne Lima Weston, who wrote this very informative paper with Ingrid Kelling (with whom I also collaborated in the past).
Personally, I will recommend this paper to people who are interested and relatively new to the topic, and in particular, to those tempted to buy the lie that private labour certifications are relentingly pushed into the industry.
I also like that, without being a lawyer, I did not read anything in this scholarly paper that was not aligned with what I wrote in the fisheries chapter I was commissioned to write for the forthcoming Oxford University Manual of Human Rights at Sea, which is reassuring. In addition, I felt very proud that they quoted seven times the paper I co-wrote with Katrina Nakamura and Yosi Ota in 2022.
As usual, I suggest reading the original… in the meantime, I quote the parts I liked the most (because I think the same!)
Abstract
The surge in visibility of human rights abuses within the seafood supply chain has propelled scrutiny into the sustainability of global fisheries, leading to heightened interest in the social performance of seafood companies and questioning the obligations of States in upholding human rights under international law. This review aims to bring clarity on where responsibility for ensuring compliance with human rights law lies within the context of the fishing industry. It provides a comprehensive analysis of international legal provisions related to the human rights of fishers, derived from both treaty law and State practice. To effectively address human rights and labor abuses, a transformative approach that prioritizes the wellbeing of workers over profit is needed, involving the implementation of participatory strategies, empowering workers and the cultivation of shared responsibility. Despite the proactive role played by the private sector in developing global standards, the review uncovers inherent limitations in relying solely on certifications for comprehensive human rights protection. The study concludes that international human right law unequivocally applies to fishers, with States primarily responsible for enforcement. As enforcement remains a challenge in the maritime context, particularly on the high seas, the burden for solutions should rest on a collaborative effort within the international arena to ensure a sustainable and ethical future for global seafood.
—
The analysis concludes that: i) international human rights law is applicable to fishers and their work; ii) enforcement of these rights is the responsibility of States in accordance with international law; iii) businesses bear responsibility for safeguarding human and labor rights in the workplace. The review concludes by calling on States, as the entities responsible for enforcement, to effectively uphold human rights.
—
International human rights law treaties contain civil, political, social, cultural and economic rights. These include universal human rights such as the right to life, liberty, security, as well as property, remedy, work (including occupational health and safety and social security), freedom of association and freedom from forced and child labor. The essence of these rights is contained within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (United Nations 1948), as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), all with nearly universal ratification.
—
The UDHR sets out the fundamental rights that apply universally to all individuals (United Nations General Assembly 2012), at sea as on land (Human Rights at Sea 2022) and therefore equally applying to fishers, whether onboard vessels or within coastal state jurisdiction (Papanicolopulu 2018). (btw… she is one of the editors of the Oxford University Handbook for Human Rights at Sea, I wrote the fisheries chapter)
—
The Law of the Sea is shaped by the “freedom of the high seas,” a long-standing principle that remains today (Churchill and Lowe 1999), which emphasizes the exclusive jurisdiction of flag States in the high seas and concurrent jurisdiction in other maritime zones (Gavouneli 2007). Ultimately, this means that flag States bear the primary responsibility for upholding the rule of law at sea and for ensuring that vessels flying their flag adhere to international law (Evans 2018). Despite this, flag State enforcement alone has proven inadequate in addressing shortcomings (Gavouneli 2007), leading to persistent human rights abuses aboard fishing vessels (Nakamura et al. 2022).
—
Despite this trend, there are significant issues with relying on seafood certifications for human rights protection. Fisheries standards and certifications presently fall short of meeting the three fundamental principles of the UNGP: support for human rights policy, human rights due diligence, and access to remedy (Decker Sparks et al. 2022). This shows that fisheries standards and certifications are not able to ensure that human and labor rights are respected in a manner consistent even with the UNGP, a minimum benchmark (Decker Sparks et al. 2022).
—
In essence, to achieve substantive outcomes, international treaties must be ratified and subsequently implemented and enforced through national laws, all while private state actors conscientiously uphold the human rights of fishers.
—
In conclusion, this review underscores the indispensable role of international law, proper implementation and enforcement through national laws, and the conscientious commitment of private and state sectors in upholding the human rights of fishers. To navigate the complexities of the seafood industry, the call is clear: a holistic and collaborative effort for meaningful and comprehensive human rights protection is the only way to ensure a sustainable and ethical future for global seafood.