Skip to content
DRAFT REPORT (COM(2024)0407 – C100098/2024 – 2024/0224(COD))

On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1026/2012 on certain measures for the purpose of the conservation of fish stocks in relation to countries allowing non-sustainable fishing

PECH-PR-766600

Committee on Fisheries · Rapporteur: Thomas Bajada

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

The draft report proposes amendments to Regulation (EU) No 1026/2012 on measures against countries allowing non-sustainable fishing. It clarifies definitions, strengthens procedures, and enhances the role of regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs). Parliament's amended version introduces definitions of 'failure to cooperate' and 'best available scientific advice', restructures Article 3 to add equal criteria for identifying non-sustainable fishing countries, and sets deadlines for responses and remedies. It requires the Commission to raise non-compliance within RFMOs before adopting measures, and to continue engaging with compliance bodies after measures are adopted.

Committee position. The rapporteur proposes amendments to strengthen the regulation, including clearer definitions, restructured Article 3, and enhanced use of RFMOs.

Key points

  1. Cooperation may be established through regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) or ad hoc arrangements where RFMOs lack competence.
  2. A country may be identified as allowing non-sustainable fishing if it fails to cooperate or adopt fishery management measures, with definitions of 'failure to cooperate' and 'best available scientific advice' introduced.
  3. Failure to cooperate includes not engaging in good faith consultations with relevant coastal states and fishing parties, including within RFMOs.
  4. Examples of failure to cooperate include undue delays in replying, unreasonable information requests or deadlines, and adopting unilateral measures not in line with agreed ones.
  5. Article 3 is restructured so each listed action is a valid justification for identifying a country as allowing non-sustainable fishing, adding a criterion on inaction against IUU fishing vessels.
  6. Before adopting measures, the Commission must raise the matter within the relevant RFMO if the stock falls under its scope, seeking timely rectification.
  7. The country concerned has a maximum of 90 days to reply to the notification and a further maximum of 90 days to remedy the situation.
  8. After measures are adopted, the Commission must continue to engage bilaterally, multilaterally, or with the compliance body of the relevant RFMO.
  9. Measures cease when corrective measures are adopted autonomously, agreed with the Union and other countries, or within RFMOs, and do not undermine Union measures.

Who is affected

  • Third countries identified as allowing non-sustainable fishing face measures and must comply with new procedural deadlines.
  • Regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) gain a stronger role in compliance processes.
  • EU fishers benefit from strengthened international fisheries governance and protection of interests.

Figures and deadlines

  • 90 days maximum to reply to notification and 90 days further maximum to remedy the situation.

Legal basis: Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union