"Chinese fishing vessels that plunder the Argentine Sea have requested refuge in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) from the Argentine Prefecture due to stormy conditions in the South Atlantic, adding this event to a series of similar permits in recent years" ( Infobae, 5/19/2025 ).
The unusual thing is that the Argentine Naval Prefecture (PNA), under the direction of the Ministry of Security, once the vessels entered the EEZ, did not carry out a series of controls on those vessels that fish for migratory species originating in the Argentine EEZ and/or associated species and/or are captured with bottom nets on the extended Argentine continental shelf, beyond 200 miles (Laws 23,968; 24,543; 24,922 and 27,557).
The cited media reports that " the Prefecture was motivated by the adverse weather conditions forecast in the Argentine maritime region issued by the National Meteorological Service, which warned of winds of up to 45 knots and waves of five meters high and under these circumstances, the Procedure for action at the request of the foreign fishing fleet to enter the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone in search of shelter due to unfavorable weather conditions was applied, provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which implied the absolute prohibition for vessels to carry out fishing, research or exploration activities in Argentine waters (and among the) clear directives established for vessels that entered, the need to keep their fishing lights off, ensure that fishing gear remained on board, on deck and properly secured, and the obligation to have their AIS positioning and communications equipment continuously on " stood out . Nothing referred to the identification of vessels; the review of fishing reports and holds, the type of nets used, the species and origin of the catches, and their size. In addition to the possible presence of illegal drugs and/or slave labor on the part of the crew, etc. We understand, therefore, that the Ministry of Security has not properly directed the PNA operations and missed an excellent opportunity to report illegal fishing to the Flag State and international organizations and begin the process of eradicating this practice of appropriation and plundering of Argentine resources in the Southwest Atlantic.
First of all, we should ask ourselves what means the Argentine Naval Prefecture has at its disposal to simultaneously control 459 foreign vessels fishing illegally in the high seas and Malvinas ( Redes, No. 223 , 2023 ) in 3,146,345 km2 of the Exclusive Economic Zone, of which some 314 are Chinese, and which every year capture 1,615,000 tons (including 30% of discards) of Argentine fishing resources for an FOB value of US$ 5.9 billion and a final commercial value of around US$ 29.94 billion.
Secondly, officials from this organization view the high seas as if they were not within their jurisdiction and, contradictorily, on the one hand, they erroneously apply the idea that "high sea fishing is legal" and, on the other, they indicate that Chinese fishing vessels "depredate the edge of the Argentine Sea," that is, on the outer limit or beyond two hundred nautical miles, on the high seas. If they "depredate," it is because, on the contrary: the fishing they carry out on the high seas is illegal , damaging the sustainability of resources, the marine environment, and the ecosystem, for the reasons we have repeatedly explained.
According to Article 87 of UNCLOS, high seas fishing is “open ” – not free as officials and media generally report; and, furthermore, under the conditions in which it is being carried out, it is ILLEGAL, because: “ Argentina could not consider the high seas capture of its migratory resources originating in the territorial sea and the Exclusive Economic Zone, and the associated resources that intervene in the food chain, legal, in principle, because it would ignore the rights it claims as its own in all its current legislation: Article 5 of Law 23.968 on maritime spaces and baselines; Article 2, paragraph c, of Law 24.543 on the ratification of UNCLOS. and, Articles 4, 5d, 21e, 22 and 23b of Federal Fisheries Law 24.922. In addition, although there are more than 40 reasons to consider this high seas catch as “Illegal Fishing”, three facts are sufficient to classify it as such: first , when vessels are not under the control of their flag States or countries of origin (Articles 87, 92, 94 of UNCLOS), an issue that occurs with vessels that fish at a distance in the Southwest Atlantic; second , when research studies are not carried out to determine the “Maximum Sustainable Catch” (articles 117 to 119 of UNCLOS), which they do not carry out either, and third , if migratory species originating in the EEZ are caught on the high seas without an agreement with the coastal State because it affects their interests (articles 27; 61 to 64, 116 to 119 of UNCLOS). Of course, to this is added fishing with bottom trawls when fishing over the Argentine extended continental shelf (article 77 of UNCLOS) beyond 200 miles without national authorization” ( César Lerena “National Fisheries Plan. One Hundred Actions. National Fisheries Law, 2023 ).
When UNCLOS refers to “fishing on the high seas being open,” it means that “all vessels of any State may fish, but under certain conditions.”
Having made this clarification, it should be noted that a foreign vessel may navigate freely within the Argentine EEZ without engaging in capture or other operations, and prior permission is not required (except for vessels to and from the Malvinas Islands, where Decree 256/10 applies); that is, it is not necessary to request refuge from the coastal State to enter its EEZ in the event of a storm. However, there is an obligation—though not absolute—for the State to provide assistance, due to the international conventions SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea); SAR (Search and Rescue); and Article 98 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which states: "2. Every coastal State shall promote the establishment, operation, and maintenance of an adequate and effective search and rescue service to ensure maritime and air safety..."
This does not prevent, by application of articles 21 ; 58 ; 61º to 64º , 73º and 77º of UNCLOS and the national legislation cited above, Argentina exercises control over vessels and migratory species originating in the EEZ caught on the high seas and/or associated with those of the EEZ, and those caught on the Argentine extended continental shelf, where even authorization and other indicated issues would be required, since the coastal State has an interest and rights over sedentary, migratory and/or associated species to ensure the sustainability of the resources in the EEZ, the aforementioned shelf and to preserve the marine environment and the ecosystem.
Customs also had to intervene; we don't know if they charged for assistance services, issued any kind of inspections or fines, and/or verified the condition of vessels that could cause an accident within the EEZ and/or had the appropriate insurance.
The Ministry of Security, together with the Argentine Navy, should establish a plan to eradicate this scourge, which impedes the development of Argentina's coastal provinces, hinders the sustainability of fishing resources, and weakens national sovereignty.
Dr. Cesar Augusto Lerena
South Atlantic and Fisheries Expert – Former Secretary of State
President of the Agustina Lerena Foundation
President of the Center for Latin American Fisheries Studies (CESPEL)
www.cesarlerena.com.ar
May 23, 2025
