The Netherlands has failed to sue the ban on pulse electric fishing

On Thursday, the EU Court of Justice dismissed the Netherlands' lawsuit against a ban on fishing by pulsed electric vessels. In 2019, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU adopted new rules for the conservation of fishery resources and the protection of marine ecosystems. These rules prohibit certain destructive fishing gear or methods that use explosives, poison, narcotics, electric current, pneumatic hammers or other percussion instruments, towing devices and grabs for collecting red coral or other species of coral and coral species, and some types of harpoons. However, during a transitional period (until 30 June 2021), the use of an electric pulse trawl is still possible under certain strict conditions. In October 2019, the Netherlands brought an action before the Court of Justice of the EU for annulment of the provisions of this Regulation concerning fishing vessels using pulsed electric current. The Netherlands argued that EU legislators did not rely on the best available scientific advice on comparing the environmental impacts of electric pulse trawling with traditional beam trawl fisheries in the North Sea. However, the Court recalled that the EU legislature is not obliged to base its legislative decision on technical measures solely on available scientific and technical opinions and has a wide discretion in the field of fisheries. In its examination, the Court limited itself to verifying that the EU legislature did not exceed the limits of its discretion. According to the Court, none of the arguments put forward by the Netherlands demonstrates the manifest disproportionate nature of the technical measures in question and the European Union legislature sufficiently explained the reasons for which it departed from the scientific opinions when adopting its legal provisions. As regards the Netherlands' argument concerning the innovative nature of electric pulse trawling, the Court of Justice of the EU has noted that the Union's objective of promoting scientific and technical progress is not the obligation for the legislator to introduce any new technique into a legislative act simply because it is innovative. Consequently, the Court dismisses the action brought by the Netherlands in its entirety.