Spanish ports – particularly Vigo – lead Europe in the landing of illegal fish by Spanish fishing vessels in the South Atlantic. These vessels, associated with British islander companies, along with Taiwanese and Korean vessels, fish illegally in the Malvina Islands and are joined by Chinese vessels when it comes to fishing for migratory resources originating from Argentina's Exclusive Economic Zone on the high seas.

Despite this, Revista Puerto (13/11/2025) informs us that the Spanish Secretary of Fisheries, María Isabel Artime García, boasts that "No product in our ports comes from IUU fishing activities." An abbreviation for illegal, unreported, and unregistered fishing. The technical term refers to “ Illegal Fishing,” which is none other than “ that in which fish species are captured without complying with international or national regulations and/or without the presence of the Flag State (Articles 87, 92, 94 and 117 of UNCLOS) and/or in maritime spaces where the maximum sustainable catch has not been previously determined (Article 119 of UNCLOS) and/or damaging the interests of third States by carrying out fishing operations without prior agreement with coastal States (Articles 27, 63, 64, 116 to 119 of UNCLOS) Regarding those species that interact or are associated or are migratory originating from the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) or migrate from the high seas to the EEZ; or, in the Argentine case, from the Argentine EEZ to the Argentine waters of the Malvina Islands or from these to the Argentine continental EEZ, where they carry out any act, of any nature, that threatens the sustainability of fishery species and/or pollutes the environment and/or threatens food security, sources of employment and the economy of the States… » ( Lerena, César “ Illegal fishing … of the fishery resources of Latin America”, 2022 ).

While illegal fishing can be carried out by national vessels within their own EEZ, the vast majority of it is illegal operation by vessels fishing long distances outside their jurisdictions. 85% of long distance fishing on the high seas is carried out by five countries: China, Spain, Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, which account for 25 million of the world's total 37 million fishing hours. For this reason, it can be seen that the greatest damage is not caused by the remaining 216 States, but is generated by only five, which are the same ones -except for Japan in recent years- that operate in the Southwest Atlantic and, therefore, efforts to reduce Illegal Fishing will have poor results if work is not done on these five countries that are responsible for the catches on the high seas , and also responsible for the imbalance of the ecosystems, since together they catch some 26 million tons of the total 84 million/year (2019), that is, 31% of the catches on 221 States that reported activity in the fishery trade (FAO, “State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture”, p: 18, 2020) .

Spanish and European officials appear to ignore this information, despite the fact that European Union regulations consider illegal fishing a serious infringement that "undermines the achievement of the objectives of the violated rules and endangers the sustainability of stocks."

When the Secretary of Fisheries states that “no products from illegal fishing enter its ports,” is this assertion based on statistical data or is it the result of on-site verification of the origin and traceability of fishery products entering Spain? This illegality is not resolved, as this official and the European Union Commissioner for Oceans and Fisheries , Costas Kadis, suggest, by digitizing certifications for market entry. On the contrary, what is being done is to “launder” illegal catches outside the maritime jurisdiction of the European Union, without on-site catch controls that only coastal states could carry out.

Inspections at landings—if the sampling were representative—validate illegal fishing, and bureaucracy condones the crime if there is no control during the catch. In this regard, Puerto Magazine states: “ Neither the Spanish official nor the European official mentioned the deficiencies of the system, whose efficiency has been questioned in various reports, including those from the European Union itself. On the one hand, only 0.29% of catch certificates received from third countries are verified by the flag state, and less than 5% of imports are inspected”; furthermore, as reported by the “Faro” newspaper of Vigo, “ the publication of a list of vessels authorized by the European Union to enter the market includes those listed as active alerts for human rights violations, among other IUU fishing activities . ” This completely undermines the inconsistent information provided by the port authorities regarding illegal fishing.  

What Secretary Artime García is proposing is pure marketing and is the complete opposite of a “ rigorous system to guarantee that no product entering our ports comes from illegal fishing activities .” At best, the digital mechanism she's announcing will eliminate the use of paper; but it's far from preventing illegally caught products from being landed in Spanish ports and then sold in the European Union and the world . The FAO has already stated that 30% of catches are illegal.

Furthermore, Secretary Artime García should be reminded that traceability is not merely "a safeguard for the oceans and an indispensable requirement for competitiveness," but rather a food safety system that ensures safety from catch to consumer's plate. And in any case, to determine the origin of the catch and whether or not it constitutes illegal fishing, as is the case with the catches by Galician vessels in Argentine waters around the Malvina Islands or regarding migratory resources originating from the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone on the high seas, Spanish vessels must comply with the Constitution of the Argentine Nation, based on Spain's recognition of Argentine independence on July 9, 1816, and the recognition of this independence by the Kingdom of Spain in the Treaty of Recognition, Peace, and Friendship with the Argentine Confederation on September 21, 1863. ratified in Madrid on 29/11/1863 and in Buenos Aires on 12/12/1863 and, with it, the Argentine ownership of all the territories that until 1816 belonged to Spain, including the Malvina Islands Archipelago and its corresponding waters ( Principle of uti possidetis iuris "as you possess, So you must possess" that It establishes that new states inherit the borders and territories of previous colonial entities .

In addition, Spain has expressly recognized Argentine sovereignty over the Malvina Islands and their corresponding waters, when the European Economic Community (EEC) signed the Fisheries Agreement between Argentina and that Community to fish in Argentine waters (Law 24.315) and, in compliance with the requirements of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); Argentine laws 23.968; 24.922 and 26.386 and UN Resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVII) and 31/49.

All catches in the Southwest Atlantic are illegal and enter Spanish ports, whether or not they are certified on paper or digitally. Regarding the total catches originating from the Malvina Islands, According to statistics from the “Malvina Islands Government” of the total of 201 licenses granted in 2024 to fishing vessels by the illegal government in the Malvinas, 37 are to Spanish-flagged vessels and 58 to “Malvinas”-flagged vessels associated with Spanish companies and, during that year 82.7% entered Spain (Redes, No. 242, 2025) and this has served to renew the Spanish fleet built on the basis of illegal fishing of Argentine resources in the Malvinas.

In addition, between 160,000 and 180,000 tons of migratory fishery resources originating from the Argentine EEZ on the high seas are entering Spanish ports.

The Secretary of Fisheries and the European Union Commissioner state that the digital system " will simplify European Union policies and laws in order to facilitate and expedite business activity." However, this does not necessarily guarantee the legality of fishing. Do these officials really think that a digital "traceability" certificate will reveal the amount of discards on board (which the FAO estimates at 30%), whether transshipments are taking place, or if the caught resources are migratory within the EEZ? Or do they assume that simply presenting "traceability" certificates will remove the illegal status of catches in Argentine waters around the Malvina Islands? How will this traceability certification reveal whether operations have been subsidized, whether "slave labor" has been used on board, or whether these practices are predatory?

One must ask why the Spanish allocate only 3% of their trawlers to EU waters and 97% to external fishing grounds, where they claim to have 193 large vessels and account for 58% of their catches? ( CEPESCA. Spanish Maritime Institute Seminar, May 20, 2020). This fishing is not selective and is carried out without on-site monitoring. Why don't Galician companies that fish illegally in the South Atlantic operate under the same regulations as Spanish companies in Argentina?

Also highly relevant is that Spain and the European Union would be violating the WTO agreements regarding the granting of subsidies to long-distance fishing.

In short, it seems that Spanish officials, after 533 years of the colonization of America, still want to keep giving us "glass beads" (colored mirrors) like they did to the indigenous people back then, and as the Mexican journalist, historian and politician Abelardo López de Ayala said, " When the scam is enormous, it takes on a decent name."

Published in Perfil, on November 27, 2025.

Dr. César Augusto Lerena

South Atlantic and Fisheries Expert – Former Secretary of State.

President of the Center for Latin American Fisheries Studies (CESPEL)

cesarlerena.com.ar