Yes. Indian fishermen get certain protections under International Maritime Law, but how much protection they actually get depends on where they are fishing and whether they comply with maritime boundaries. Key protections • United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – Recognises territorial waters (12 nautical miles), contiguous zones (24 nautical miles), and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ – up to 200 nautical miles). – Fishermen operating within India’s EEZ are under India’s jurisdiction and protection. – If they accidentally cross into another country’s EEZ, they are still entitled to humane treatment under UNCLOS. • Right to Humane Treatment – Even if detained for crossing maritime boundaries, foreign authorities must respect their human rights, provide consular access, and avoid excessive punishment. • Bilateral Agreements – India has agreements (e.g., with Sri Lanka) for the release and repatriation of detained fishermen, often through diplomatic negotiations. • Protection in Dispute Zones – In disputed waters, international law urges states to resolve fishing issues through dialogue rather than force. However: If fishermen cross into another country’s territorial waters (within 12 nautical miles) without permission, that country’s domestic law applies, and they can be arrested — international law won’t prevent it, though it can ensure fair treatment.

Indian fishermen do receive certain protections under International Maritime Law, but the extent of protection depends on where they are fishing and whether they comply with international boundaries: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): This treaty recognizes territorial waters (12 nautical miles), contiguous zones (24 nautical miles), and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ, up to 200 nautical miles). Indian fishermen operating within India’s EEZ are under India's legal protection. If they accidentally cross into another country’s EEZ, they are entitled to humane treatment under UNCLOS, such as respect for human rights, consular access, and protection against excessive punishment. Right to Humane Treatment: Even when detained, international law obligates foreign authorities to treat fishermen humanely and ensure fair procedures. Bilateral agreements, like those between India and Sri Lanka, facilitate the repatriation and release of detained fishermen through diplomatic negotiations. Bilateral Agreements and Diplomacy: India regularly engages with Sri Lanka and other neighboring nations to address fishermen's arrests, emphasizing a humanitarian approach and discouraging the use of force. Fishers' Responsibility: If Indian fishermen cross into another nation’s territorial waters without permission (within 12 nautical miles), that nation's domestic law prevails, and international law primarily ensures fair and humane treatment, not immunity from prosecution. Legal Obligations and Challenges: While UNCLOS and related agreements provide frameworks for protection and dispute resolution, enforcement of rights and safeguards often depends on diplomatic dialogue, national laws, and practical cooperation. Ongoing issues include repeated arrests, confiscations, and penalties, highlighting that protections under international law offer limits and do not guarantee unconditional immunity. In summary, Indian fishermen are protected by international law to the extent that such laws require humane treatment and fair procedures if boundaries are accidentally crossed, but legal immunity is not absolute. Practical protection depends as much on compliance with boundaries as on diplomatic efforts and bilateral agreements.

Indian fishermen do receive certain protections under International Maritime Law, but the extent of protection depends on where they are fishing and whether they comply with international boundaries: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): This treaty recognizes territorial waters (12 nautical miles), contiguous zones (24 nautical miles), and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ, up to 200 nautical miles). Indian fishermen operating within India’s EEZ are under India's legal protection. If they accidentally cross into another country’s EEZ, they are entitled to humane treatment under UNCLOS, such as respect for human rights, consular access, and protection against excessive punishment. Right to Humane Treatment: Even when detained, international law obligates foreign authorities to treat fishermen humanely and ensure fair procedures. Bilateral agreements, like those between India and Sri Lanka, facilitate the repatriation and release of detained fishermen through diplomatic negotiations. Bilateral Agreements and Diplomacy: India regularly engages with Sri Lanka and other neighboring nations to address fishermen's arrests, emphasizing a humanitarian approach and discouraging the use of force. Fishers' Responsibility: If Indian fishermen cross into another nation’s territorial waters without permission (within 12 nautical miles), that nation's domestic law prevails, and international law primarily ensures fair and humane treatment, not immunity from prosecution. Legal Obligations and Challenges: While UNCLOS and related agreements provide frameworks for protection and dispute resolution, enforcement of rights and safeguards often depends on diplomatic dialogue, national laws, and practical cooperation. Ongoing issues include repeated arrests, confiscations, and penalties, highlighting that protections under international law offer limits and do not guarantee unconditional immunity. In summary, Indian fishermen are protected by international law to the extent that such laws require humane treatment and fair procedures if boundaries are accidentally crossed, but legal immunity is not absolute. Practical protection depends as much on compliance with boundaries as on diplomatic efforts and bilateral agreements.

Dear Client, Yes, we have that Indian fisherman is protected by international maritime laws ,which at large do depend on the issue at hand and the particular legal structures in play. The main international agreement which puts this into practice is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which India has signed. Here is how it works: 1. In India’s Marine Zones: India which is a coastal state has the right and jurisdiction over its maritime zones as per the UNCLOS. These zones are: India has full right of sovereignty in this area which also includes the power to pass domestic laws. Also fishing in these waters is a regulated issue for the central and state governments. In that which is referred to India has the authority of a sovereign in respect of the exploration and exploitation, conservation and management of natural resources, both living and non living. This means that which is related to the issue of fishery regulation within the EEZ India does. Also as an instance of what we have done in domestic law which plays out that right, the 1981 Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act is put forth. 2. In Foreign Countries’ Maritime Areas: Indian fishermen see to it that they go beyond or into the International Marine Boundary into the territory of a foreign neighboring country like Sri Lanka or Pakistan which in turn causes the issue at hand. Violation of Sovereign Rights: When a fisherman crosses that line which marks the border they are broken the other country’s laws which includes rights to that marine area. The foreign navy or coast guard in that area has the right to arrest the fisherman and take his boat in according to their own country’s laws which we see often in the case of the Sri Lankan Navy. While the UN Convention includes a right of “innocent passage” for ships through a foreign country’s territorial waters that right does not include fishing. Fishing, polluting, and spying are not to be considered “innocent” and are thus subject to the coastal state’s laws. Historic Fishing Rights: In certain fishing communities which include that of the Palk Strait it is passed down that they have “historic fishing rights” from practices which went on for centuries. Though some international legal cases have recognized these rights what we see is that they are not put forth in the UNCLOS and also that their implementation is a matter of bilateral agreements and which play out in international dispute resolution as is the case with the India Sri Lanka fishing dispute. 3. At Sea: Beyond the EEZ of any nation (which is to say the High Seas) the principle of “freedom of the high seas” applies. This includes the freedom to fish. But this freedom is not absolute and is subject to international agreements. Regulations and Treaties: UNCAT and also other international agreements which include the UN Fish Stocks Agreement call for states to work together in the conservation and management of fish stocks in the high seas. Indian flagged vessels operating in these areas are made to follow certain rules which they must put into practice as well as get permits under national law which includes the Guidelines for Regulation of Fishing by Indian Flagged Vessels in the high seas. Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs): India a member of many RFMOs which include the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission that manage fish stocks in specific areas. Indian fisherman operating in those areas must follow the conservation and management measures put forth by these organizations. In a nutshell we see that although international law as in the case of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea sets out the structure for fisherman’s rights and protection what Indian fisherman get in practice is a result of their compliance to India’s own laws as well as the marine boundaries and laws of other countries. When violations do occur the issue is taken up between India and the which country in question via diplomacy. I hope this answer helps to resolve your queries. Don’t hesitate to reach out with any further questions.