EU Presidency Statement - Working Group on Marine Biodiversity, Agenda Item 5d

Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction; Possible options and approaches to promote international cooperation and coordination; Statement by Prof. Dr. Gerhard Hafner, Austrian Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the European Union.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

Coming to the end of our deliberations, I would like to explain our view on the future steps to be taken and offer some comments on the Implementation Agreement as proposed by the EU.

We acknowledge with great satisfaction that there exists a broad consensus that urgent action as referred to in paras 66 to 69 of Resolution 59/25 to address destructive practices and to protect marine biodiversity and particularly vulnerable ecosystems. These are important short term measures. The EU shares the view of other delegations that these short term measures must include the better implementation of existing relevant obligations, increased adherence to existing international instruments and strengthening existing bodies in the interest of the protection of marine biodiversity. The EU remains fully supportive of the initiatives undertaken in this field by the General Assembly and is committed to carrying forward the review established under para 71 of Resolution 59/25.

Permit me now to offer some explanations concerning the Implementation Agreement proposed by the EU. I hope that these explanations could assuage the doubts expressed by some delegations in the last days concerning this issue. Existing institutions only tend to apply a sectoral approach. An Implementation Agreement would allow for a cumulative impact assessment across different sectors. Of course, it would not be a rigid and bureaucratic way of imposing a set of cumbersome rules on existing institutions. The Implementation Agreement would help to implement already existing obligations for international cooperation with respect to the protection of marine ecosystems already contained in UNCLOS.

Such an Implementation Agreement could draw on the experiences gained in regional organizations. However, these regional bodies have a limited scope of application as well as limited membership. The envisaged Implementation Agreement under UNCLOS would undoubtedly be an important supplement to these regional bodies.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

Let me continue by making some comments on how the work should now proceed for the sake of the protection of marine biodiversity:

Many states have called for a continuation of these discussions. The EU, too, would support this, and would in particular suggest that the next General Assembly decides to convene another Ad hoc informal working group in 2007 which in our view should consider how to develop an Implementation Agreement and should suggest the terms of reference for the negotiation of this agreement.

We believe that an Implementation Agreement should be developed along the following lines:

(i) The instrument should be based on an integrated and precautionary approach to the management of biodiversity protection and conservation in ABNJ, taking into account the impact of all human activities.

(ii) The instrument should facilitate and enhance co-operation and co-ordination between existing regulatory frameworks and bodies that are competent to exercise their respective mandates to regulate activities under their responsibility;

(iii) The intent is not to take away the existing powers or independent decision-making from RFMOs, IMO, ISBA or any other sectoral body.

(iv) It should provide for the establishment of MPAs based on the identification and designation of vulnerable ecosystems and species in marine areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, using the best available scientific information and the precautionary principle;

(v) Measures in areas beyond national jurisdiction must be based on the best available scientific information and the precautionary principle and be coherent and compatible with measures taken within national maritime zones;

(vi) The Implementation Agreement must be elaborated and applied in the context of, and consistent with, UNCLOS and international law, and be without prejudice to the jurisdiction and sovereign rights of the coastal state over its territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and Continental Shelf.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

We agree with the need expressed by several delegations that MPAs be established on the basis of solid scientific data. While the international community is developing the policy framework for the establishment of MPAs in ABNJ, we believe it is important that work on the development of scientific criteria for their identification and establishment is carried forward.

| Haut |

• EU Presidency Statement - Working Group on Marine Biodiversity, Agenda Item 5b  (15/2/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - Working Group on Marine Biodiversity, Agenda Item 5c  (15/2/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - Working Group on Marine Biodiversity, Agenda Item 5a  (14/2/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - Working Group on Marine Biodiversity  (13/2/2006)