More troubling political decisions by the GoG.

Sermitsaiq 09-02-2024

Bar association: Deeply worrying fisheries law proposal

For reasons of legal certainty, the Government of Greenland's draft law for a new fisheries law is deeply worrying when it comes to the redistribution of quota shares. At the same time, it will trigger significant negative societal consequences, says the law association, Greenlandic Law Firms.

Leiff Josefsen

JØRGEN SCHULTZ-NIELSEN

Friday, February 09, 2024 - 07:40

Three aspects of the proposal for a new fisheries law in particular have been criticised by Greenlandic Law Firm in a consultation response.

The Association of Lawyers assesses that a new quota ceiling, in which existing actors must forcibly cede quota shares, "is an extremely intrusive regulation in relation to acquired rights, which have expropriative elements and may be contrary to Article 73 of the Constitution".

- This could also entail significant negative socio-economic consequences, as such regulation is likely to trigger large expropriation damages (full compensation) from the Government of Greenland and thus burden the public finances, writes Greenlandic Law Firm and adds:

- The proposed transitional regime does not appear to remedy this.

Principles of equality

The association also points out that "contrary to the principles of administrative law equality, a higher quota ceiling is maintained for Royal Greenland A/S, regardless of the fact that Royal Greenland A/S operates on a private law basis in the form of a limited company".

- Royal Greenland is also operated on a commercial basis and not on the basis of public regulation in the form of concessions or the like (unlike Tusass A/S and Royal Arctic Line A/S). Thus, special rules are made to take Royal Greenland A/S into account, which entails a significant imbalance of quota shares in relation to other players, states Greenlandic Law Firm.

Opacity

The introduction of a new limited quota share period and a right of termination is also receiving criticism.

- According to the information provided, the right of termination is intended as a method of repatriating quotas for redistribution. In this connection, it is completely unclear who and under what conditions termination can take place, including to whom redistribution should take place (including whether recovery can take place in tenders or the like), it says worryingly, and the Bar Association states that there is a "high risk of opacity associated with this".

At the same time, it points out that it can lead to "discretionary denunciations and awards and thus unclear framework conditions", which can also "be contrary to the principles of administrative equality".

The broad estimates

It is also of concern to Greenlandic Law Firms that the bill authorises the Government of Greenland to "exercise broad discretion and to lay down detailed rules on a number of matters" when it comes to:

• Criteria for the splitting/distribution of quotas
• Division/allocation of quotas
• Turnover of quota shares and annual quotas
• Compulsory transfer of quotas

In its response to the consultation, the Danish Bar and Law Association calls for "the bill to be reconsidered and adjusted considerably" and calls on Naalakkersuisut to provide "a transparent basis for calculation in relation to the socio-economic consequences that the bill entails".

mitsaiq 09-02-2024