MEMORANDUM for the Korean Mission in Tokyo to be communicated to the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs as a replying note of the Korean Government.
With reference to the note of the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs dated April 23, 1955 informing its views concerning the establishment of the Law for Conservation of Fishery Resources and the reason for eanctment of the same Law of the Korean Government, following are the views of the Government of the Republic of Korea to be communicated to the abovementioned Japanese Minister:
1. In the Japanese note, it is stated that "it is not clear whether or not the said zone has been established under the concept of the so-called Contiguous Zone ...". The establishment of the Fishery Conservation Zone, hawever has no direct connection with the concept of "Contiguous Zone" recognized under international law, although the said zone is contiguous in its literal sense or adjacent to the Korean territorial waters. According to the same note, "the fishing activities in the contiguous waters should never be subjected ... to the control of the littoral states", probably from the Japanese viewpoint of international law. In this connection, the Government of the Republic of Korea wishes to call the attention of the Japanese Government, as it did on many occasions to the recent development on the regime of the high sea, in which a keen attention must be paid to bethat there are remarkably advanced methods of fishing which unless controlled properly might easily exhaust entire marine resources of the world. As long as it can be said that there has never existed nor exists a principle of international law which is ▣...▣presidemtial enough to keep its empty shell in spite of an altered situation to which application of such principle of international law became apparently inadequate, the view of the Government of the Republic of Korea is that a supreme concern of the nations in the contemporary world over regulation of fishing on the high seas is and should be to maintain unceasing productivity to be effected by conservation of marine resources. The Government of the Republic of Korea, of course, does not hesitate to declare that it is most sincere in seeking an agreement to be reached with a nation or nations concerned upon the conservation of marine resources of the high seas adjacent to her maritime belt. It is, however, the conviction of the Government of the Republic of Korea that in absence of any such agreement or any possibility of such agreement which, as far as in relation to Japan, was found to be very slight as a result of the foregoing Korea-Japan conference, it could not sit idle to see the abovementioned portion of the high seas left without being subject to any measure of conservation of resources, which it then deems to be the rights and duties of the littoral state.
2. The Japanese Government in its note questions the Korean establishment of the fishery conservation zone, overcolcuring a difference between the said establishment of zone and one proclaimed by the American President on September 28, 1945. The point of its argument may be that such a unilateral action should not apply to foreign nationals accordingly also to Japanese nationals "in regard to the fishing activities in those areas of the high seas which have never been developed and maintained by Korean nationals alone". The Government of the Republic of Korea considers this argument to be utterly meaningless, recalling the unfortunate history of the past thirty-six years down to the year 1945 where one may not forget that the fishing by Korean nationals on the waters adjacent to the Korean peninsula has been subject to the exlusive control by the Japanese Government which took the form of license granted thereby; Furtherand that such Korean nationals could not but watch their adjacent waters devastated by the audacious despoilers from Japan.
3. In paragraph 3 of its note, the Japanese Government argues to the effect that the actual records of fishing by Korean nationals in their adjacent waters do "not necessarily afford the Republic of Korea any legal grounds on which to exercise unilaterally exclusive jurisdiction over such waters" in view of the fact that "many Japanese nationals have since olden times sailed out fishing on the high seas adjacent to the Korean peninsula". In view of the Government of the Republic of Korea, it must be said that "actual records" which deserve that name should be the actual records of activities repeated bona fide, and accordingly no actual record of aggression should be the reason for the aggressor to claim anything. Even if the argument of the Japanese Government concerning the "actual records be admitted, the view of the Government of the Republic of Korea is that a claim to the jurisdiction over the waters adjacent to a certain littoral state in no way accrues from the so-called actual record of fishing, but but from the actual records of measure for conservation of fishery resources, which is recognized by so many nations as the rights and duties of the littoral state, that is, in the case of the waters referred to in this note, the Republic of Korea.
4. The Government of the Republic of Korea is unable to comprehend the views of the Japanese Government on the principles of international law which it reiterates in the latter's note closing its eyes to the conservation of fishery resources of the high seas, for which so many nations are noticeably devoting themselves to achieve even its codification. It is stated in the Japanese note that the measures taken by the Government of the Republic of Korea is"unfriendly" act to the Japanese Government because such measures were taken in the course of talks with the Japanese Government regarding the conservation of fishery resources. The Government of Republic of Korea, in this regard, wishes to call the attention of the Japanese Government to the fact that the Japanese Government had shown its reluctancy to commence a negotiation for the fishery question in the last quarter of the year 1951 and the Korean Presidential Proclamation. of Sovereignty over Adjacent Seas was announced on January 18, 1952. Even if it is assumed as stated in the Japanese note that the Republic of Korea is unfriendly to the Japanese Government, one may well say that it is most unfriendly act of the Japanese Government that it presses an empty claim for eighty-five pet cent of all Korean property in Korea.
5. The Government of the Republic of Korea wishes to take this opportunity to confirm that it has done its utmost efforts to negotiate with the Japanese Government to settle all pending questions including the conservation of fishery resources, but such efforts could not be brought to any token of fruition.
The Government of the Republic of Korea furthermore wishes to inform the Japanese Government that the fishery question constitutes an integral part of all the questions pending between the two nations not to be seperated from the settlement of the remaining other questions.