Regardless of the fact that we do not share the issues relating to internal security, the proposal of the PEN of September 17, 2026 to the H. of the project of “LAW OF DEFENSE OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY” MEN-2026-275-APN-PTE that is signed by the President; the Minister of Foreign Affairs; the Minister of Defense; the Minister of Economy; the Chief of the Cabinet of Ministers and, strangely, does not sign the Minister of Security and, in its grounds, absolutely omits the applicable Argentine legislation relating to Fishing (Laws 20,645; 22,584; 24,216; 24,543; 24,922; 25,263; 26,386; 27,564); It is interesting to evaluate some of its foundations and articles applied to hydrocarbons that, by analogy, could be taken into account in the illegal exploitation of fishing resources by foreign vessels in the Argentine waters of the Malvina Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (hereinafter Malvinas).

The draft bill from the National Executive Branch states (in quotation marks): " Specifically, through TITLE I, a sanctioning regime is established that surpasses that provided for by Law No. 26,659 and its amendment, allowing for the prevention, punishment, and discouragement of activities that involve exploitation." of the resources natural without the corresponding qualification of a authority " Argentine ." This is exactly what happens with illegal fishing activities carried out by foreign vessels—without authorization from the Argentine Enforcement Authority—in Argentine waters around the Malvina Islands. As we have stated, not a single law related to fishing is mentioned, and reference is made only to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, ratified by Argentina through Law 24,543. This is insufficient because, given that the Malvina Islands are a national territory, Argentine laws that are not repealed should apply, as is the case with Law 26,659 (2011), which in practice has only been applied twice: Rockhopper Exploration was barred from fishing for 20 years (2013), and perfil.com

Navitas Petroleum received the same disqualification (2022) and through the recent ruling of the Federal Judge of Rio Grande, Dr. Mariel E. Borruto, who resolved a precautionary measure on the aforementioned companies.

"… He project of law aggravates the sanctions criminal consecrated in the Law No. 26,659 and his amending, and anticipates new figures criminal (…) In this regard, more severe prison sentences, fines and special disqualification are established for those who, without authorization of the authority competent, order either perform activities of prospecting either exploration of resources No renewables in he litter either subsoil of the sea territorial Argentinean either in the Platform Continental Argentina. In addition, he text proposed aggravates the penalties referred to to the activities of prospecting, exploitation and extraction of hydrocarbons of deposits located in said areas, So as his transport either storage. In conjunction with this, the conduct of those who supply those who carry out the aforementioned activities, knowing this to be the case, is also criminalized, a scenario not contemplated in current law .” The reference to “non-renewable resources” does not include fishing, which is a renewable resource. 

" The bill expressly incorporates the continuity of criminal and administrative liability in the face of legal proceedings of transformation, fusion, cleavage, assignment global of assets and liabilities, transfer of background trade or other forms of reorganization corporate. That responsibility will subsist when, of “In a covert or merely apparent manner, the economic activity continues and the substantial identity of the clients, suppliers, and employees, or the most relevant part of them, is maintained .” In the fishing carried out in the Malvina Islands, the corporate structure is so complex that it requires an in-depth analysis of the fishing companies, the banks that finance them, the shipyards, and the insurance companies that facilitate illegal fishing in the Malvinas.   

“ In turn, the text incorporates the possibility of conducting trials in absentia for the criminal offenses stipulated in the initiative. It seeks to overcome one of the limitations that has affected the effective application of the regime established by Law No. 26,659 and its amendments. It provides the system with a procedural tool that allows the conduct covered by the law to be effectively investigated, tried, and, where appropriate, punished, even when the accused is not at the disposal of the Argentine justice system .” This rationale would apply—not to the oil company itself, but to the illegal activity carried out by foreign fishing vessels—their financiers, suppliers, etc.—in the Malvina Islands; because we should not lose sight of the fact that the Malvina Islands, South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands, and the corresponding waters ARE ARGENTINE TERRITORY, even though it is foreigners who appropriate the fishing resources in that national territory .  

" The administrative sanctions provided for in this bill are intended to penalize the development of activities in territory Argentinean without count with the qualification corresponding of the Authority competent. For their part, the criminal sanctions contemplated respond to a more serious conduct, linked to the ignorance of the sovereign rights that the Argentine Republic exercises and claims over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces ."  Same as previous paragraph. Although here it refers to “sovereign rights” that are violated when, through illegal licenses granted by an illegal government in the Malvinas, foreign vessels fish our resources in the Malvinas.  

" The creation of the present regime is consistent with the sovereign claim of the Argentine Republic. The objective No is only sanction to who perform activities in territory national low a illegitimate permit granted by a State foreign, but also discourage said activities, for protect The natural resources that are, indisputably, the property of the Argentine Republic, as they are located within its territory .” And this is theoretical, because, as we have said, it would suffice to apply Law 26,659 and Law 24,922 et seq. with sufficient sanctioning power, and since 1998, when the aforementioned Law 24,922 was enacted, only in 2016 did the Ministry of Agroindustry apply the maximum fine stipulated in said Law to the Chilean company Empresa de Desarrollo Pesquero de Chile SA (EMDEPES) for the fishing by the vessel Unión Sur in 2014, with a British permit, in an area near the Malvina Islands; serving as a precedent, because the company accepted the penalty and paid. It was the first and only time. 

“… TITLE IV of the bill establishes as an administrative offense the performance of any act, activity, decision or operation that affects or threatens National Security, when it originates from a foreign State or foreign organization (emphasis added), or is carried out by a natural or legal person acting for their own benefit. either, direct either indirectly, by account, order, low he control, with financing either in benefit of them. The infraction is established when such conduct has as its object or effect: to threaten the integrity territorial of the Argentine Republic; interfere, through media clandestine, deceptive either coercive, in the decision-making process of their constituted authorities; threaten the integrity of Critical Infrastructures declared to be of interest; or finance, facilitate, or materially collaborate with such conduct, with knowledge of its purpose or the circumstances that determine its illicit nature . ” “ In this way, the initiative incorporates a tool for institutional protection against contemporary forms of state interference that do not necessarily present themselves as a conventional aggression, but that can compromise sovereignty, territorial integrity… ” . While we do not agree with the scope of the law, since it refers exclusively “to a Foreign State or Organization,” when dealing with these, the Argentine State should act to ensure—as stated in the First Transitory Provision of the National Constitution—our territorial integrity and full sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and the corresponding maritime spaces. Indeed, when the government does not act against the plundering of our fishing resources in the Malvinas by foreign vessels, it effectively admits foreign intervention in our island and maritime territories. Fishing in the Malvina Islands is not only an economic and social issue, it is also a violation of national sovereignty.       

" He QUALIFICATION IV contemplate, in addition, a regime of measures urgent for the assumptions in that exist a "A serious and imminent risk or threat to National Security, and it is necessary to act urgently to prevent its occurrence, continuation, or worsening ." Illegal fishing in the Malvina Islands weakens national sovereignty and consolidates the British presence in Argentine island and maritime territories. From 1989 to the present, foreign vessels in the Malvinas have caught—according to statistics from the illegal government of the islands—an average of 250,000 tons of Argentine fishing resources annually; a situation that also serves to weaken Argentine sovereignty over the islands and their corresponding waters.

" TITLE V introduces modifications to the National Defense Law No. 23,554 and its amendment, with the The aim is to adapt its content to the risks, threats, and challenges currently facing the Argentine Republic. The initiative redefines National Defense as the state function aimed at permanently guaranteeing the sovereignty and independence of the Nation, his integrity territorial, his ability of self-determination… ». Inserting the “capacity for self-determination” here is truly imprudent, in light of the opposing positions between Argentina (territorial integrity) and Britain (self-determination of peoples).

“ Title VI contains provisions aimed at strengthening institutions against undue foreign influence. National security also requires protecting the State’s decision-making autonomy and the free formation of democratic will: a nation that does not safeguard how its own decisions are formed can hardly safeguard its territory .” Although we do not agree with the policies pursued by the government regarding the Malvina Islands and the corresponding island territories and waters, and even with the original draft of the Bases Law, which proposed a complete opening of the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone to foreign vessels.

It is impossible to examine all the articles of the bill here; however, I highlight the statement in Title I, Chapter 1, Article 1, which affirms: “ The Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces constitute an integral part of the Argentine national territory. The National State has as a permanent and non-negotiable objective to make every effort possible to…” its scope to achieve its recovery and the full exercise of sovereignty."

Article 2° « Activities in the Malvina Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, in maritime spaces and insulars surrounding and in the Platform Continental Argentina only they will be able to to be carried out observing the conditions established by the Convention of the United Nations about The Law of the Sea, this law, other laws and regulations in force." This article is truly generic, because that Convention (UNCLOS) does not specify Argentine rights over the Malvina Islands and the corresponding waters, but rather through laws 20,645; 22,584; 24,216; 24,922; 25,263; 26,386; 27,564, which it does not detail; nor Law 24,543, which ratifies UNCLOS and specifies Argentine rights over the Malvina Islands in Article 2. 

Article 3 states: " It is prohibited for any natural or legal person, national or foreign, and any trust, estate of affectation, contract associative, grouping, entity either contract that, without make up a artificial person , carry out some of the following activities: a) develop in the Malvina Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, in the surrounding maritime and insular spaces and in the Platform Continental Argentina any guy of activity intended to the exploitation of renewable or non-renewable natural resources without the relevant authorization granted by the competent Argentine authority; b) to celebrate acts legal, including operations economic, financial, logistics, techniques either of consulting, with a subject that rape the prohibitions planned in he paragraph to), when saying act result essential and indispensable for the viability or execution of the project; c) be a partner, shareholder or direct participant of an entity that carries out any of the activities prohibited in subsection a)… » Along with repeating the “surrounding spaces” and not “corresponding” as indicated by the CN. It legislates on issues already provided for in art. 27 bis of 24.922.

Article 12 specifies: “ The administrative act ordering the disqualification shall establish a period of orderly cessation, which may not be less than thirty (30) consecutive days nor more than one hundred and eighty (180) consecutive days from its notification .” This establishes flexibility, similar to the Withdrawal and Regulation Regime provided for in Article 32, even though it concerns the appropriation by third parties of Argentine resources and warrants no delay in addressing what is, at the very least, criminal conduct.

Article 71 states , “…The passage of a foreign vessel in the territorial sea of the Argentine Republic shall be considered detrimental if it carries out any of the following activities: a) any threat either use of the force against the sovereignty, the integrity territorial either the independence policy of the Argentine Republic, or that in any other way violates the Principles of International Law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations (…) e) the embarkation either landing of any product, currency either person, in contravention of the laws and customs, tax, immigration or health regulations; g) activities of fishing either of investigation either uprisings hydrographic, without the due authorization…». An authorization that the Argentine Naval Prefecture already has by virtue of Law 24,922 and does not exercise. 

The operative part of the bill reaffirms what is explicitly stated in the law's preamble: that it is not written to protect Argentine fishing resources, but rather, at best, to increase sanctions against hydrocarbon companies. This could be applied to fishing by analogy, with a bit of intellectual effort, and disregarding the "barrel of oil" standard used in the sanctions regime. However, a "National Security" bill that does not include the Ministry of Security but does include the Ministry of Defense represents a step backward from policies that enjoyed overwhelming support in the National Congress. We did not address these policies because they fall outside the scope of fishing and illegal fishing in the Malvina Islands, which we have undertaken in this article when evaluating the Executive Branch's draft Law on the Defense of Sovereignty.

Dr. César Augusto Lerena

South Atlantic and Fishing Expert

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

cesarlerena.com.ar

24/9/2026