WCPFC member states urged to uphold UN agreement

While the WCPFC claims to operate with an exemplary degree of transparency, it notably excludes observers from the WCPFC’s TCC’s report drafting sessions, said Accountability.Fish, pointing out that these multi-day, closed-door meetings have been held without the participation of civil society representatives since the commission’s establishment nearly 20 years ago.

Accountability.Fish has specifically named the 17 members of the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) as actively blocking the attendance of observers: Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.

“By excluding observers from these vital compliance discussions, WCPFC stands alone among tuna RFMOs in blocking civil society’s ability to accurately monitor the sustainability of its fisheries,” Accountability.Fish Global Director Ryan Orgera said. “This lack of transparency is detrimental not just to NGOs, but to a wide range of stakeholders—including market players, academic researchers, and conservation organisations—who are shut out of this critical part of the decision-making process.”

In addition, Accountability.Fish has also named Canada, the EU, France, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Indonesia and the United States of America as “complicit” nations that turn a blind eye to the WCPFC’s lack of transparency thereby contradicting their own commitment to sound governance.

Accountability.Fish argues that the closed-door practice contradicts international norms, including those set forth in the UNFSA, which has been ratified by all of the blocking nations and most of the other WCPFC-member nations (except China, Taiwan, and the Philippines). Articles 12 and 13 of the agreement specifically call for approved observers to have access to meetings and processes.

Despite these commitments, WCPFC members continue to shield key discussions from public scrutiny, citing concerns that NGOs might “air dirty laundry” and unfairly scrutinise certain nations, it said.

While some member nations have voiced opposition to these closed sessions, Accountability.Fish believes more proactive measures must be taken to align WCPFC with its own transparency policies and international obligations.

The organisation is urging the 17 FFA countries and other WCPFC members to push for reforms that would open these crucial meetings to civil society. It insists that such transparency is essential to maintaining trust in WCPFC’s effectiveness and ensuring long-term sustainability in the region’s fisheries.

“Our only goal is to ensure more transparent and accountable processes in RFMOs, which we believe is key to achieving sustainable outcomes,” Orgera said. “We’re calling on WCPFC members to uphold their international commitments and allow for the civil society engagement that is critical to protecting the world’s tuna stocks by sending them formal letters and requesting a response.”

Accountability.Fish is a global initiative committed to increasing openness and accountability in international fisheries decision making. It is funded by the Oceans Five Foundation.