Fishing and Sea of Azov delimitation

The mid-July incident with two Ukrainian fishermen and Russian border guards has exposed an acute problem – the need to delimitate the sea border between Ukraine and Russia. Although Kyiv and Moscow signed a state border treaty in 2003, it said nothing about delimitating the water area of the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch.

Den has already told the story of Oleksandr Fedorovych, the only fisherman who survived after a collision between his boat and a Russian border patrol vessel (see “Who Will Help the Surviving Ukrainian Sailor?” . It will be recalled that the incident claimed the life of four out of five Ukrainians who were on a boat in the Sea of Azov which can supposedly be used by both Ukraine and Russia under certain agreements.

“We were about 30-35 km off the Ukrainian shore. It is common knowledge that there is no border as such, for the sea is under a common jurisdiction of Ukraine and Russia. It was said earlier that the other country’s territory began 4 km off the shore and the same applied to our side,” Fedorovych told The Day. He is now in Yeysk, Krasnodar Territory, Russia, under a written pledge not to leave the place. “And, besides, there are four dead bodies here. They must be blamed on somebody,” the fisherman says in despair.

As is known, criminal proceedings were instituted against the Ukrainian the other day. Russian prosecutors are accusing him of illegal fishery. According to Fedorovych, the fish was “found” two days after this tragic incident. “They found a net and some rotten fish and said this carried a 60,000-ruble fine or payment of about 300,000 rubles without a fine. Look, what for and who to shall I pay if a court imposes a fine on me? But they may as well put me inside because this [Criminal Code] article calls for up to two years in prison,” Fedorovych says.

“All these problems must be taken into account. But the first thing the Ukrainian side should do today is to use the existing international laws and agreement to bring the Ukrainian citizen back home. One must first protect his interests and only then negotiate the problems that have always existed. I think it is the very example of an extraordinary situation.”

To clear up the circumstances of this tangled high-profile case, The Day turned to Dmitry Pervushkin who investigates it. But he refused to comment, saying that he is not authorized to do so, and readdressed us to the press service of the Black and Azov Sea Coast Guard Directorate. But the press service of this agency did not answer our phone calls.

We were told at Ukraine’s Consulate General in Rostov-on-Don that the case had been transferred to the prosecution service of Novorossiysk. Further developments will be known within 10 days, Consul Vasyl SERDEHA says. In his words, Ukraine insists that the case was opened without ample grounds. “The case runs counter to the standard-setting instruments now in force in both Ukraine and Russia. In particular, it is the agreement on joint use of the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch. As long as the Sea of Azov has not yet been delimitated, no matter what actions individuals may take on a restricted territory, they are not subject to punishment under the Russian law,” Serdeha said, commenting on the situation. He added that Ukraine is still waiting for comments from the Russian side, “although we have been repeatedly sending notes and turning to investigatory bodies.” All the Russians are saying is that investigation is still on.

The Consulate General also assured us that they are actively cooperating with Fedorovych’a lawyer Victoria PROSVIRINA. “I think he is standing a good chance for the case to be resolved in his favor because, in our view, the materials comprise very scanty evidence of his guilt,” Prosvirina told The Day. “Fedorovych is being accused of the illegal catches of marine biological resources (fish) in the Sea of Azov and Taganrog Bay waters. The investigator believes that he has collected sufficient material to pronounce him guilty. But there can be two variants of developments here: either the prosecution office will submit the case to court or the case will be referred for additional investigation. This will be known within 10 days.”

***

The Day asked Valerii Chaly, Deputy Director General of the Razumkov Center, to comment on the conflict situation and say, in particular, whether it will speed up delimitation of the maritime border in the Sea of Azov and Strait of Kerch waters.

“This case raises very many questions. Firstly, borders or no borders, border guards should interact with and show a proper attitude to the neighboring state. Moreover, this should be not only on the level of declarations but also on the level of competent bodies.

“Secondly, there are in fact no mechanisms to get this case to be examined lawfully. Ukrainian law-enforcement bodies are practically deprived of the possibility to offer their own analysis of the situation, although it is an open case. The Russian side is cooperating very slowly.

“And thirdly (more seriously), were the negotiations on the format and parameters of the delimitation of sea areas held in the right direction? Today, the subcommittees and experts that deal with this matter should draw certain conclusion and perhaps revise their positions. In any case, the problem of borders and sea disputes between Ukraine and Russia must be finally settled. On the other hand, it is obvious that incidents like this are not conducive to cooperation.

“I guess it is high time to put this question to a higher level of discussion – to bilateral Russian-Ukrainian bodies which could at least publicly assess the situation. The efforts of the Ukrainian consul and other diplomats are an important element. But this incident has crossed the limits of diplomatic relations alone.

“What keeps the two sides from delineating the border in the Sea of Azov and Strait of Kerch waters? Russia is prepared to do so – with due account of her conditions and approaches. Yes, there is a problem of borders, but it is not the main one in this case. The main thing is the way the two sides interact in their frontier regions. To what extent constructive are the actions of border guards and law-enforcement bodies on both sides, to what extent effective are mechanisms of bilateral cooperation, for they were established to settle this kind of situations too? It seems to me they are working insufficiently today.

“We have concluded an agreement on the principles of delimitation in the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch. Russia’s position was to jointly use [these territories]. We can sew now how this is complicating the situation. As for the Black Sea basin, it is about economic interests, extraction of energy resources, etc. This situation shows that the principle on which Russia so seriously insisted is not perhaps simplifying the situation but is creating a problem today. It is hardly possible to get back, but this should be taken into account.

“On the one hand, Ukraine should be interested in establishing a state border that is transparent and reliable for both countries. But, on the other, there should also be clear-cut mechanisms for cross-border cooperation.

“All these problems must be taken into account. But the first thing the Ukrainian side should do today is to use the existing international laws and agreement to bring the Ukrainian citizen back home. One must first protect his interests and only then negotiate the problems that have always existed. I think it is the very example of an extraordinary situation.”