捕魚實體公海登檢：法律與實踐

The Law and Practice of Fishing Entities on High Seas Boarding and Inspection

廖柏翔(Po-Hsiang Liao)

指導教授 ： 姜皇池

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2020年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202002412

摘要

本論文所要探討的問題是：是否有法律文件，得作為捕魚實體享有船旗國專屬管轄之形式證明？藉由整理與分析相關文件與學術文獻，本文依序分從四個層次討論此問題：一、國際法下之船旗國專屬管轄原則與例外；二、1982年《海洋法公約》到1995年《魚群協定》公海漁業體制之變遷，及其重要成就；三、現今訂有公海登檢機制之12個漁業管理組織相關規範和實踐；四、我國以捕魚實體身分參與各漁業管理組織之模式和地位，及適用公海登檢機制之邏輯和實踐。
本文結論主要有三：一、由《海洋法公約》、《魚群協定》和區域性漁業管理組織規範所構成之三層次國際漁業法體系，不論是公海登檢機制或捕魚實體權利義務，都是在區域性漁業管理組織層次，予以落實而產生具體法律效果。二、我國以捕魚實體身分參與之各個區域性漁業管理組織，本質上是成立於我國與各該組織間的合作機制，此合作機制規範我國在各組織法律地位，並在運作之餘，承認我國權利義務範圍。三、在訂有公海登檢機制之組織中，其他國家針對我國問題，而向組織發出之登檢通知，係屬對於捕魚實體公海登檢能力及船旗國專屬管轄之承認行為。

關鍵字

國際海洋法 ； 國際漁業法 ； 船旗國專屬管轄 ； 區域性漁業管理組織 ； 捕魚實體 ； 公海登檢

並列摘要

This thesis examines whether there is any legal instrument that formally evidences the flag state exclusive jurisdiction of fishing entities. By exploring and analyzing relevant instruments and publications, it approaches the question from four aspects: first, the principle of flag state exclusive jurisdiction and its exceptions under international law; second, the development and critical achievements of the high seas fisheries law under the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea (CLOS) and the 1995 Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement (FSA); third, rules and practices of the 12 RFMOs with high seas boarding and inspection (B I) mechanisms; last, the arrangements and status that allow Taiwan’s participation in pertinent RFMOs, as well as the underlying rationale and practices of high seas B I mechanisms that apply to Taiwan.
Three conclusions are drawn. First, as the CLOS, the FSA, and RFMO regimes constitute the three-level international fisheries law institution, it is the RFMO regime that gives legal effects to both the application of B I mechanisms and the rights and obligations of fishing entities. Second, the mechanism for cooperation concluded between Taiwan and the respective RFMO serves as the cornerstone that allows Taiwan to participate in the work of the RFMO as a fishing entity. Not only does it dictate the legal status of Taiwan under a particular RFMO regime, but recognize Taiwan’s specific rights and obligations through actual practice. Third, under RFMOs regimes with B I mechanisms, states recognize the flag state exclusive jurisdiction of fishing entities by sending B I notifications in relation to Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

international law of the sea ； international fisheries law ； flag state exclusive jurisdiction ； regional fisheries management organizations ； fishing entities ； high seas boarding and inspection

參考文獻

壹、漢語文獻

一、漢語書籍

丘宏達、陳純一（編）（2019），《現代國際法參考文件》，修訂二版。臺北：三民書局。

何勝初、姜皇池（著）（2012），《國際漁業組織參與之理論與實務》。高雄：農委會漁業署。　

姜皇池、陳國勝、葉雲虎（著）（2011），《公海漁業登檢之理論與實務：以WCPFC登檢為核心》。高雄：農委會漁業署。