EU-Hof legt Frankrijk extra boete van 57 mln euro op wegens niet-naleving visserij-regels (en)

The European Commission decided, today, that France has not yet taken all the necessary steps to comply fully with the obligations laid out in a ruling of the European Court of Justice of 12 July 2005 (IP/05/917 ).

This ruling, addressing France's failure to fully comply with a Court judgment of June 1991, concerns failings in both the fisheries control system and the sanctions applied for breaches of EU rules on the landing and marketing of immature fish, particularly hake. France will therefore have to make a penalty payment of € 57,761,250 as decided by the Court, for every 6-month period from the July 2005 judgment, until France fully complies with her obligations.

On the basis of a thorough and rigorous assessment of the situation, in France, on 12 January 2006, the Commission concluded that France has made progress, but could not yet be regarded as having fully complied with the Court judgment. The Commission is convinced that France is able to fully meet this objective by July and will do its utmost to assist France in this respect.

The penalty payment comes on top of a lump sum of € 20 million, imposed under the same Court ruling and already paid by France, for failure to comply with the 1991 Court ruling. The provisions for financial penalties were introduced under the Treaty of Maastricht. The aim is to encourage Member States to ensure full respect for the rule of law.

The July 2005 Court case goes back to a ruling on 11 June 1991 which found that France had failed in her enforcement obligations related to measures designed to protect undersized fish (below the legal minimum size), especially hake, and, where infringements were detected, the absence of deterrent sanctions.

In subsequent years, the Commission noted the continued failure of France to comply with this Court judgement and sent two reasoned opinions, in 1996 and 2000. The removal of young fish from the sea before they can contribute to stock renewal is a destructive practice. To lessen the risks and deter catches of immature fish, measures, such as the setting of minimum landing sizes, are therefore taken. In the case of hake, it should be noted that, given its depleted state, the stock has been subject to a recovery plan, since 2004. Furthermore, catches of small fish have been identified as the primary cause of depletion.

In the absence of progress, the Commission decided, in August 2002, to ask the Court to impose a daily penalty of €316,500 until France complied with her obligations. On 12 July 2005, the Court ordered France to pay a lump sum of €20 million and, instead of a daily penalty payment, imposed a periodic 6-monthly penalty of €57,761,250, starting from that day. In its ruling, the Court took into account the persistence and seriousness of the failings, France's ability to pay and the public and private interests at stake. The Commission's task was therefore to assess whether or not, on 12 January 2006, France had fully complied with the Court ruling.

To enable it to carry out this evaluation, the Commission took a number of steps, including meetings and exchanges of correspondence with the French authorities, as well as inspections by Commission officials in France. In a letter to the French authorities, the Commission clearly outlined what France had to achieve to fully comply with the Court ruling.

In its evaluation of the situation in France, at the end of the first 6-month period, the Commission welcomes the positive steps taken by France. However, a number of the measures taken by France have still to have the required impact on the ground, while others have still to be put in place

With regard to control, shortcomings were still noted in the numbers, quality and thoroughness of inspections of the fishing, landing, transport and marketing activities. This was often due to the limited human resources dedicated to this purpose, the lack of application of an integrated inspection strategy and, often, to the lack of specific training of inspectors. The combination of these persistent weaknesses means that the control system put in place at the moment leaves too many possibilities for continued illegal landings.

As to the effectiveness of sanctions, the Commission notes the entry into effect, on 6 January 2006, of changes in the French legislation, extending the application of administrative sanctions to all infringements of EU fisheries rules. Naturally, this was too short a time to have had a practical impact on the ground. Furthermore, the Commission noted that the follow up of detected infringements was still unsatisfactory in both the extent and amount of the sanctions applied.

On the basis of the evidence at its disposal, the Commission decided that, at this stage, the enforcement regime (including control and sanctions) set up by France cannot yet be considered as amounting to full compliance with its obligations under the 2005 Court ruling. It therefore calls on France to take all necessary steps so that, by next July, the said obligations will be fulfilled. The Commission is convinced that France is able to fully meet this objective by July and will do its utmost to assist France in this respect.

Background

Member States are responsible for the enforcement of the measures adopted by the Council of Ministers under the Common Fisheries Policy. The task for the Commission is to ensure that Member States carry out this obligation in an effective and equitable manner.

See MEMO/06/101 and MEMO/05/482.