UNCLOS, EEZ, and fish
According to President Duterte, it is okay to allow Chinese fishermen to fish inside our Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) because we are friends. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the EEZ of a country is “a sea zone over which a state has special rights regarding the exploration and use of marine resources, including energy production from water and wind.
It stretches from the baseline out to 200 nautical miles from its coast. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources.” That’s about 370 kilometers. It gives the country sovereign rights to whatever lies beneath the sea, but not sovereignty over the area.
It covers fishing and the surveying and exploitation of minerals, oil, and natural gas, again within its EEZ. If a defined EEZ cannot be established between countries close to one another, for example, the Philippines and Taiwan, then the EEZ of each country must be discussed and agreed upon. China is a signatory to UNCLOS III, which was ratified in 1994.
The problem with Duterte's statement is if China will respect the EEZ of each country in the region since it claims practically the entire ocean. What if China says why would they need to be allowed to fish anywhere if they own the area? The fact is China is too far from their own EEZ that does not overlap with ours.
They may argue that their artificial islands should also have an EEZ, thereby covering the whole South China Sea. Panatag Shoal would have its own EEZ since they already claim it. We would then have to ask permission from them like what happened at Panatag Shoal.
How many times have we heard Chinese officials say sovereignty over the South China Sea is non-negotiable? How many times have we heard their top military brass declare that they are ready to defend their territory in the South China Sea? The only question for them is the permission they will give to each country. Obviously, this discussion is lopsided. One only needs to see the amount of fish they have caught over the years as compared to our fishermen. The harvesting of giant clams is another example.
We apparently planted the seeds but they were the ones who reaped the bounty. Chinese officials may be smiling when meeting their local counterparts but the situation is totally different in the high seas. The administration may be friends of China but when it comes to the territorial dispute, China will not budge. Nothing stops their ships, whether these are coast guard, fishermen, or maritime militia pretending to be fishermen, from enforcing their territorial claims.
The collision of Gem-ver 1 and intentional abandoning of the Filipino fishermen may have been a message regarding fishing at Recto Bank which is well within our EEZ like they frequently do to Vietnamese fishing boats at the Paracels.
As for the comments of Senate President Vicente Sotto III with regards to proving exclusivity over maritime resources that fish from China may have migrated to our EEZ, hence the Chinese have a right to catch them and vice-versa, I really have nothing to say.
- Latest
