Legal Study on the Relationship between Certain Aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation and Key Provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation Including an Evaluation of Existing Options on Improving the Joint Recommendation Procedure and Proposal of Additional Options

The report examines the legal friction between the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and the proposed Nature Restoration Law (NRL). It argues that the CFP's Article 11 'joint recommendation' process—used to protect marine areas from fishing—is plagued by delays, a de facto veto for fishing states, and a lack of accountability, which risks undermining the binding restoration targets of the NRL. The author proposes that the NRL be drafted with specific triggers and deadlines to force the CFP process forward and recommends that the European Commission take a more active role as a facilitator and mediator to prevent the watering down of environmental protections.

• The Article 11 'joint recommendation' process for protecting marine protected areas (MPAs) from fishing is criticized for being slow, favoring commercial interests over conservation, and lacking stakeholder engagement and scientific advice.
• Member States with a direct interest in fishing effectively hold a veto over joint recommendations by refusing to agree to proposals or by not participating in the process.
• The proposed Nature Restoration Law (NRL) risks being undermined because it relies on CFP mechanisms for implementing marine restoration, potentially allowing restoration measures to be watered down outside the NRL's stricter structure.
• The author suggests the NRL should include specific triggers for the joint recommendation process, such as a 12-month deadline for communicating 'sufficient information' after the NRL's adoption.
• The European Commission should transition from a passive role to an active facilitator and timekeeper, potentially using emergency measures to protect sites or initiating infringement proceedings at the European Court of Justice.
• Directly amending the CFP to fix the joint recommendation process is considered a slow and risky option, as it could potentially weaken existing conservation measures.
• The NRL cannot be used to legally amend the CFP because the two frameworks operate under different legal bases in the EU Treaties.
• International law, including UNCLOS and the OSPAR convention, supports the argument that Member States have a shared responsibility to protect the marine environment, which should inform the implementation of the CFP.

APA

Barnes, R. (2023). Legal Study on the Relationship between Certain Aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation and Key Provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation Including an Evaluation of Existing Options on Improving the Joint Recommendation Procedure and Proposal of Additional Options. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/zg3dowv5/legal-study-on-the-relationship-between-the-common-fisheries-policy-and-the-proposed-nature-restoration-regulation.pdf

Chicago

Barnes, Richard. Legal Study on the Relationship between Certain Aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation and Key Provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation Including an Evaluation of Existing Options on Improving the Joint Recommendation Procedure and Proposal of Additional Options. ClientEarth, 2023. https://www.clientearth.org/media/zg3dowv5/legal-study-on-the-relationship-between-the-common-fisheries-policy-and-the-proposed-nature-restoration-regulation.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Barnes |first1=Richard |title=Legal Study on the Relationship between Certain Aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation and Key Provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation Including an Evaluation of Existing Options on Improving the Joint Recommendation Procedure and Proposal of Additional Options |publisher=ClientEarth |date=4 May 2023 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/zg3dowv5/legal-study-on-the-relationship-between-the-common-fisheries-policy-and-the-proposed-nature-restoration-regulation.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{barnes2023legal, author = {Barnes, Richard}, title = {{Legal Study on the Relationship between Certain Aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation and Key Provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation Including an Evaluation of Existing Options on Improving the Joint Recommendation Procedure and Proposal of Additional Options}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2023}, month = may, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/zg3dowv5/legal-study-on-the-relationship-between-the-common-fisheries-policy-and-the-proposed-nature-restoration-regulation.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }