WCPFC의 조업 규제와 국제법상 형평의 원칙

Since WCPFC entered into CMM 2013-01 where the high seas purse seine effort limits were set, the same criteria have been applied until now in its subsequent conservation and management measures. According to this, U.S.A. has been limited for 1,207 days in its high seas purse seine effort, whereas Republic of Korea has been limited for 207 days. Furthermore, such criteria apply to distant water fishing states(non-SIDs CCMs) only, and do not apply to small costal states(SIDS CCMs). Given that such conservation and management measures of WCPFC can be construed as allocation of fishing rights, this paper analyses how the principle of equity in international law applies in that issue. Traditional discussions concerning equity were focused on conceptual approaches whether equity can function as a source of international law and specific applications thereof especially in delimitation of maritime boundaries cases. Recently, however, there has been a need for research on how equity can play a role in issues involving the interests of many countries, such as environment and resource sharing. Considering the interpretation of the relevant clauses of the UNCLOS and the UNFSA and the ICJ cases, the principle of equity in international law may apply to the issue of allocation of fishing rights on the high seas. In addition, the ‘three-step approach’ established by the ICJ in delimitation of maritime boundaries cases may also apply. That is, fishing rights on the high seas may be allocated according to the three-step approach; the step 1 - Allocation based on past catches of each flag nation, the step 2 – Consideration of relevant circumstances, and the step 3 – Review based on the proportionality. In this regard, allocation of purse seine fishing days on the high seas as per WCPFC conservation and management measures is hardly an application of the principle of equity in international law. It is necessary to point out that applying the concept of equity under international law is to derive relevant circumstances and to check any imbalances, rather than to realize distributive justice through the concept of equity.