France’s ongoing inaction with regard to the destruction of marine ecosystems by trawling has been acknowledged by President Emmanuel Macron
Ecological activist organisation Bloom has accused the French government of orchestrating an ecological deception at the third United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC). The organisation announced legal action against the state for its false claims of marine protection.
Days after a United Nations Summit on protection of the oceans hosted by France in Nice, a French ecological organisation has accused the French Government of deception and fiasco at the crucial meeting attended by delegations from around the world.
In a press statement, Bloom says it exposed the French government’s deceptive ecological strategy at the United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC), in trying to convince the international community it was protecting 4 pc of its metropolitan waters from bottom-trawling when these zones were in fact, already exempt from this destructive fishing method.
The statement adds that the organisation also exposed the government’s moral corruption pact with the lobbies that are destroying the ocean and democracy, the same ones that are harassing Bloom and its founder, Claire Nouvian, with an unprecedented smear campaign.
According to the statement, the French government’s attempts to conceal its diplomatic failure have failed as the UNOC discussions concluded 24 hours ahead of schedule because the programme organised by the French State was all empty rhetoric that carefully avoided the two main issues at stake for the ocean and the climate: fossil fuels and industrial fishing.
It adds that given France’s ongoing inaction with regard to the destruction of marine ecosystems by trawling, which has been acknowledged by President Emmanuel Macron himself on French television, Bloom decided to take the French government to court to protect the ocean.
“Emmanuel Macron and the Minister for Ecological Transition, Agnès Pannier-Runacher, are engaged in a toxic relationship with the industrial fishing lobby and have made lying a way of governing. They have gambled France’s diplomatic credibility in a EUR 60 million poker game,” says the statement.
According to Bloom, on June 7, Macron arrived in Nice with what he described as “important announcements,” particularly concerning marine protected areas and the banning of bottom trawling. With this, he appeared to signal an end to decades of negligence regarding the destruction of metropolitan marine ecosystems and the marginalisation of small-scale fishers. Initially, NGOs responded positively to the news, hailing it on the morning of June 8 as “a good first step” and “a little progress.”
According to Bloom, on June 7, Macron arrived in Nice with what he described as “important announcements,” particularly concerning marine protected areas and the banning of bottom trawling. With this, he appeared to signal an end to decades of negligence regarding the destruction of metropolitan marine ecosystems and the marginalisation of small-scale fishers. Initially, NGOs responded positively to the news, hailing it on the morning of June 8 as “a good first step” and “a little progress.”
However, the Ministry for Ecological Transition later released a press kit outlining France’s commitments to protecting its waters, particularly those in metropolitan areas.
According to the statement, just hours later, Bloom revealed that the 4 pc of supposedly new marine areas slated for strong protection by the end of 2026, where bottom trawling was to be banned, were, in fact, regions where such practices were already prohibited.
This discovery pointed to a deliberate strategy of misinformation by the French President and his government.
This discovery pointed to a deliberate strategy of misinformation by the French President and his government.
In response, Member of Parliament Jean-Louis Roumegas submitted a formal question to the government in the Legislative Assembly, demanding transparency and clarification on who was responsible for creating a map that, in reality, offered no additional protections.
At the same time, industrial fishing lobbies acknowledged in public statements and letters to fishers that bottom trawling bans already existed in the “new” areas or were already being put in place.
The organisation claims that as media scrutiny intensified, Minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher and the government aligned themselves with the fishing lobbies, going so far as to discredit Bloom publicly.
During this international summit, the French President made every effort to conceal the government’s lack of action by diverting attention to Polynesia, where the local government announced the creation of the world’s largest marine protected area. He also leaned heavily on existing United Nations processes, particularly the ongoing work around the high seas treaty (BBNJ), says the statement
During this international summit, the French President made every effort to conceal the government’s lack of action by diverting attention to Polynesia, where the local government announced the creation of the world’s largest marine protected area. He also leaned heavily on existing United Nations processes, particularly the ongoing work around the high seas treaty (BBNJ), says the statement
With the upcoming implementation of the high seas treaty and the announcement of the first Ocean COP scheduled for autumn 2026, the President declared a major achievement, telling France 2 that “the high seas will no longer be the Far West.” While this treaty will allow the international community to move forward on matters such as the fair distribution of benefits from marine genetic resources, it’s important to note that governance of the high seas is already regulated by numerous international agreements.
Fishing in international waters is already subject to oversight by regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) under the FAO. As such, the high seas treaty does not have the authority to tackle the threat of industrial fishing, especially since 90 pc of global fish catches occur within national jurisdictions, a number that climbs to 99% when it comes to bottom trawling.
Bloom, in the press statement adds that true leadership, in contrast, came from the United Kingdom, Samoa, and the government of Polynesia:
Bloom, in the press statement adds that true leadership, in contrast, came from the United Kingdom, Samoa, and the government of Polynesia:
The United Kingdom, which began a genuine marine protection policy a decade ago thanks to pressure from NGOs like the Blue Marine Foundation, has announced a ban on bottom trawling in half of its English marine protected areas. It also launched consultations on a transition plan for the fishing sector to safeguard marine ecosystems from industrial fishing. Environment Secretary Steve Reed delivered a genuine lesson in political courage and foresight, particularly to the European Union, which had launched a failed arbitration against the UK’s marine protection policies the previous year, and to France, which had threatened “retaliatory measures” when the UK first proposed the trawling bans in its protected zones.
Samoa also showed strong political will by establishing nine new marine protected areas, reaching the goal of 30 pc ocean protection, an area comparable in size to Vietnam, where fishing is strictly prohibited.
In addition, the Polynesian government announced the creation of a massive marine protected area spanning over 5 million sq km, with 900,000 sq km under strict protection.
Beyond these individual national announcements, the United Nations conference revealed a troubling void. The European industrial fishing lobby expressed satisfaction over the adoption of a weak final statement, the Nice Declaration. Although symbolic, the declaration, which could have represented a turning point in addressing the oceanic climate and ecological emergency, was gutted of its ambition and vision, reduced to vague and non-committal statements. The two central drivers of ocean destruction, fossil fuels and industrial fishing, were left entirely out of the agreement:
The words “trawling” and “industrial fishing” are completely absent from the text. The declaration fails to address key strategies that could drive the fishing industry toward a truly ecological and socially just model. It ignores vital topics such as public subsidies, quota distribution based on social and environmental standards, and banning destructive practices in protected marine areas. Even the critical issue of protecting human rights at sea is missing, despite well-documented and widespread abuses in certain fishing sectors.
Regarding climate change and fossil fuel dependency, the declaration only suggests that impacts be “minimised”, a grossly inadequate response. This omission is especially egregious considering that 145 parliamentarians from 39 countries had called for world leaders to back a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty at the start of the UNOC. A projected rise of over 4°C in global temperatures could result in the death of 4 billion people.
Finally, Blooms adds that the abrupt decision to close negotiations 24 hours early effectively hijacked the entire conference. It silenced dialogue among states, scientists, and NGOs, dismissing their contributions outright.
This starkly contrasted with the 2022 UNOC in Lisbon, where the conference was held in a single venue, allowing for robust exchanges between all participants. In Nice, however, the French government shut down those opportunities, isolating civil society in a remote location and showcasing its alignment with corporate lobbies. This maneuver not only demonstrated the government’s bias but also highlighted the illegitimacy of a process shielded behind “silver passes,” undermining the very foundations of democratic debate, dissent, and transparency.