Commercial fishing in municipal waters will affect small fishers – group

The Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas said the Supreme Court’s decision affirming a Malabon Regional Trial Court ruling that allowed commercial fishing in municipal waters would severely impact the livelihood of small fishers.

MANILA, Philippines — The Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya) said the Supreme Court’s decision affirming a Malabon Regional Trial Court ruling that allowed commercial fishing in municipal waters would severely impact the livelihood of small fishers.

The trial court ruled on the petition of Mercidar Fishing Corp. to declare the preferential access of small-scale fishers to municipal waters as unconstitutional.

In a statement on Thursday, Pamalakaya said approximately 90 percent of every municipal water would “be open for exploitation of big-fishing firms” if commercial fishing vessels are permitted to operate within the 15-kilometer municipal water zone.

“This means only a small portion of municipal waters will be left for small-scale fishers. This will have a serious impact not only on the livelihood of fishermen but also on fish production and food security of every community,” Pamalakaya vice chair Ronnel Arambulo said.

Citing an initial study by a marine scientist, the Pamalakaya said only 10 percent of municipal waters are less than seven fathoms deep.

“Aside from the impact [of the SC ruling] on the livelihood of fishers, the entry of commercial vessels into municipal waters will also harm marine resources,” Arambulo said.

Pamalakaya noted that more than two million registered municipal fisherfolk and a significant number of subsistence fisherfolk nationwide would be affected by the high court’s ruling.

The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Reforms (BFAR) said last month that it was coordinating with the Office of the Solicitor General to study the possibility of seeking further review by the SC.

In a statement earlier, the agency said the SC First Division’s resolution on the case “is not yet final.”

“The agency is dedicated to ensuring that a fair and just resolution is reached. This highlights the importance of the case in shaping policies and programs that impact the fisheries sector, particularly in relation to environmental protection, resource management, and the rights of affected stakeholders,” the BFAR added.

It also vowed to continue upholding its mandate to protect and conserve the country’s aquatic resources while safeguarding the welfare of small-scale fishermen and coastal communities.

“The agency remains committed to the rule of law and the protection of national interests and sustainable fisheries management,” BFAR added.

Groups, including Pamalakaya and international marine protection group Oceana, have slammed the high court’s decision and urged concerned government agencies to contest the ruling.

“This resolution will create confusion among enforcement agencies including our coastal cities and municipalities which are already hard-pressed with enforcement and performing their mandate of protecting municipal waters and the livelihoods of their constituents amid meager funds,” Oceana Vice President Gloria Estenzo Ramos said.

Ramos also said various stakeholders should have been included as “indispensable” parties to the case since the case is an environmental issue and covered by the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.