A lawsuit filed by environmental NGOs ClientEarth and Oceana, regarding Spain’s reluctance to investigate allegations that vessels owned by Spanish companies have engaged in illegal fishing off foreign coasts, has been appealed to the Spanish Supreme Court.
In April 2025, the two NGOs sued Spain for refusing to cooperate in investigations into illegal fishing activities allegedly committed by Spanish-owned fishing vessels off the coasts of Senegal and Guinea Bissau. The organizations accused Spain of bias when it comes to taking action against its own vessels operating in other countries.
ClientEarth's Marine Ecosystems team said the accusations against Spanish vessels are backed by data from maritime intelligence and vessel-tracking platforms, as well as testimonies from local fishing organizations and coastal communities that confirmed the vessels regularly breach E.U. maritime and fishing regulations.
For instance, Spanish-owned fishing vessels were found, according to ClientEarth, to be engaging in such actions as systematically switching off their automatic identification systems (AIS), which are mandatory tracking devices for all E.U. fishing vessels over 15 meters in length.
The case, which was rejected before going to trial by the High Court of Madrid, has now been appealed to the nation’s Supreme Court, which Oceana has urged “to confirm that E.U. member states must act to prevent illegal fishing, even before vessels are formally added to illegal fishing blacklists.”
Spain has stated it lacks jurisdiction to investigate and sanction Spanish-owned vessels that have not been added to illegal fishing blacklists and operate outside national waters. However, Oceana and ClientEarth termed Spain’s interpretation of regulations “dangerous” as it aids in creating loopholes in the E.U.’s efforts to stop illegal fishing.
According to Oceana Senior Policy Advisor Ignacio Fresco Vanzini, Spain’s conduct, especially its refusal to probe companies that own fishing vessels operating under foreign flags, "sends a dangerous signal: that responsibility stops at the flag."
"This loophole encourages reflagging to countries with weaker oversight and puts honest fishers and coastal communities at risk," he said in a release.
“Interpreting the rules so narrowly would mean that hundreds of vessels flying non-E.U. flags, but backed by European financial interests, could fish illegally without being challenged,” ClientEarth Senior Lawyer Nils Courcy added. “This contradicts E.U. laws and undermines the system designed to prevent illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. The Supreme Court should, therefore, bring Spanish law in line with E.U. rules and objectives.”
The two NGOs said that a Spanish Supreme Court ruling would not only help define how E.U. member nations interpret and implement their monitoring and enforcement responsibilities under the E.U.’s illegal fishing framework but would also help bring Spanish law in line with E.U. rules and objectives.
The NGOs’ appeal before the Spanish Supreme Court coincided with the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Spain and Senegal, in which both nations committed to fight against illegal fishing activities.
The new MoU was signed during Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye’s official visit to Madrid on 24 March, with Spain pledging to support Senegal's drive to improve its resource sustainability, training, research, and governance in its fisheries sector.
