Reconstruction Of Flag State Responsibility In Addressing Illegal Fishing Justly

Abstract

The efforts to combat illegal fishing as a transnational crime have not yet yielded optimal results. Illegal fishing continues to occur and brings significant losses to the world, especially to coastal countries. The fines imposed by coastal states are always unpaid by the captain, while imprisonment as a substitute for fines is not possible according to international legal instruments. On the other hand, the shipowner as the beneficiary owner cannot be touched by the law either. The reconstruction of flag state responsibility is considered capable of addressing illegal fishing, given its existence thus far, which has practically been ineffective due to the absence of clear and firm regulations on what and how flag states should be responsible.This research uses a normative legal method by evaluating the principle of flag state responsibility based on existing illegal fishing cases, examining the concepts of ship flags, comparing illegal fishing countermeasures in other countries, and of course, not overlooking international agreements related to illegal fishing as a transnational crime. Article 94 of UNCLOS explains the obligations of the flag state towards its ships in technical, administrative, and social aspects by conducting due diligence. Neglecting due diligence causes the flag state to be responsible for illegal fishing conducted by its ships. The use of the flag state responsibility principle is considered the most ideal concept to address the root problems in combating illegal fishing. The Flag State is positioned as the party with the most significant role, particularly in terms of oversight and enforcement, and ultimately, international cooperation becomes the spearhead of this mechanism.