۵ The United Nations Fish Stocks Convention, in Article 18, is somewhat broader in the obligations it imposes on the flag State, partly because it was drawn up during and after the conclusion of the Compliance Convention, which enabled the parties to build on what had already been agreed. The United Nations Fish Stocks Convention also obliges the flag State to take measures to ensure that vessels flying its flag do not engage in unauthorized fishing in areas under the national jurisdiction of another State. The registration of fishing vessels, international cooperation and implementation shall be fully addressed in the provisions of the Agreement. The Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (the Compliance Convention) aims to strengthen the role of flag States and to ensure that a State strengthens its control over its vessels in order to ensure compliance with international conservation and management measures. 2 It currently has 10 acceptances. In practice faO, Article XIV agreements are first approved by the Conference (which generally corresponds to signature) and then open to “adoption”, which has the same function as ratification or accession. This practice is fully consistent with the language used in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of Entry into Force of Treaties. A parallel development has taken place with regard to attempts to prevent the practice of vessel circumvention in order to avoid the application of conservation and management measures on the high seas defined by regional fisheries organisations. In calling for a conference on straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks, UNC also called for measures to be taken to prevent this custom. In essence, the problem was that only ships flying the flag of the parties to the organization could be compelled to comply with the conservation measures it had defined. Some vessels were then registered in countries that were not bound by the relevant conservation measures.
The vessel was then able to fish with impunity in an area subject to conservation measures and to argue that it was not bound by those measures by international law, since its State of registry was not a Contracting Party. Article V deals with international cooperation and the exchange of information (e.g.B. evidence) concerning the activities of ships in order to assist the flag State in identifying ships flying its flag that have allegedly carried out activities that undermine international conservation and management measures. There is also a provision for port State cooperation when a vessel that is voluntarily in a port and is believed to have undermined international conservation and management measures. The Parties are strongly invited to conclude, on a global, regional, subregional or bilateral basis, cooperation or mutual assistance agreements in order to achieve the objectives of the Agreement. It recognizes the special responsibility of flag States to ensure that none of their vessels fish on the high seas, unless authorized to do so and that they can effectively exercise their responsibilities to ensure that their vessels comply with international measures. Article VI provides for the exchange of information in which each Party should provide FAO with certain information on fishing vessels to be put into service regularly by FAO. . . .