Zulficar Mochtar - Courtesy of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Ministry

A shortage of raw materials has struck the local fish-processing industry as it reels from the impact of an expansive crackdown on illegal fishing. The Jakarta Post’s Rendi A. Witular recently talked to the Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Ministry’s acting director general of fishing, Zulficar Mochtar, on the ministry’s response to the problem. The following are excerpts from the interview:

Question: The processing industry, particularly in Bitung, North Sulawesi, and Muara Baru in Jakarta, has lodged complaints over raw material shortages. How do you respond to this?

Answer: The ministry has conducted an analysis and evaluation of 1,132 nationalized foreign vessels [known locally as ex-asing and formerly operated as joint ventures with local companies]. Because all have violated the regulations, minor and major ones, the ministry has terminated their operations. Many of these vessels used to operate in Bitung, Ambon and Tual in Maluku and Merauke in Papua. These locations are notorious for illegal, unreported and unregulated [IUU] fishing activities. In the past, many fish processing units [UPIs] received their raw materials from these vessels.

With the vessels no longer operational, the supply of raw materials to the UPIs has been cut. At the same time, we have seen a more than twofold jump in the volume of fish caught by small fishermen in Bitung after the illegal fishing crackdown. The problem in raw material shortages is because there has been a disconnection between supply from the fishermen to the industry.

The industry operates without any limitation by seasons, and they have quality and quantity standards that should be continuously met while traditional fishermen usually set sail for as much as nine months in a year and their catches are of various sizes.

Our job now is to upgrade the fishermen’s capacity to cope with the industry demand, and the UPIs should sit together with the fishermen to work out an amicable partnership. We will push for such partnerships although they will take time to implement. Another alternative for the industry in sourcing the supply is through imports. This year so far, imports have declined by 50 percent compared to the same period last year.

Another problem in the industry is its installed capacity. In Bitung, for example, they have 54 UPIs and their overall capacity is just too big, although in practice they used to run at only 50 percent capacity.

Because it is impossible to fulfill 100 percent, there should be a verification of the industry’s claims. We should not comply with their demand unless we really know the exact amount of their confirmed orders.

The UPIs have long depended on the ex-asing vessels, and now they have to adjust the way they source their material by partnering with small fishermen. The problem in Bitung is an isolated case, and it does not occur in most other areas.

Because Bitung is an IUU hot spot, it deserves special treatment. I have recently found out that a lot of the fish from the area have been illegally shipped to General Santos [nearby fish processing cluster in the southern Philippines]. Although we have put in place strict supervision, such practices still occur. Many fishing vessels under 30 gross tons (GT) transfer their catches to transportation vessels in the middle of the sea for delivery to General Santos. That explains why the fisheries industry there is peaking again after a plunge last year following our policies against IUU fishing.

In the case of Muara Baru, much of the fish there has been supplied from Bitung. The crackdown on IUU practices in Bitung has caused supply interruption. Again, we have to verify the confirm orders there because we are suspicious that the problems only occur in specific places but are blown up as though it is a national-level problem.

Local fishing companies and UPIs have proposed the relaxation of a regulation on transshipment so that they can efficiently catch more fish to address the raw material shortages. How do you respond to that?

What we prevent is the transshipment for delivery to other countries. We have already relaxed the regulation by allowing transportation vessels to deliver the catches to local ports only and for UPIs. If we find the regulation to be too inflexible, we will try to include it in the upcoming revision of Ministerial Decree No. 30 on the fishing business. But it will not mean that we will allow even a slight crack in the transshipment policy that can be misused for our fish to be illegally transported overseas.

So what will be included in the upcoming regulation revision?

Transshipment [for overseas delivery], the use of foreign vessels, the negative investment list for the fishing business are off limits from the revision. Input from the public includes the need to relax transshipment [for delivery to local ports]. In Bitung, we have allowed 10 transportation vessels to operate, and we will see whether this has been well accepted by businesses. Other issues in the revision will include harmonization and simplification of the many different regulations on the fishing business, including requirements for fishing vessels. We hope to pass the revision in October at the latest.

Some of the 1,132 nationalized vessels have received ‘clear status’ from the audit. Can they operate now?

No. They have to deregister, meaning that after paying all the taxes they are required to leave the country because they are of foreign origin, and we have prohibited the use of any foreign-made fishing vessels. The minister’s policy has saved the majority of our fishermen who own vessels of below 10 GT. Such vessels account for around 90 percent of all fishing vessels in Indonesia. Our local shipyards are now flourishing as they have received many orders to replenish the gap left by the prohibition of foreign-made vessels. There has also been a jump in the demand for new fishing vessel licenses in the past year.

But some of the cleared vessels were bought in early 1980s or bought through an open and fair bidding process upheld by our courts. Should this kind of vessel be barred from permanent use here?

Foreign-made vessels are off limit. We’ve been very traumatized by these kinds of vessels. But the example that you mention is very casuistic. But in principal they also have to deregister.

What happens if they don’t want to deregister?

We will turn their vessels into rumpon [artificial reefs].

Popular

RI, Australia strengthen partnership on taxing crypto assets

Analysis: Indonesia denies normalization with Israel to enter OECD

Citroen to produce electric cars in Indonesia