Science too Lethal
The International Court of Justice ordered Japan to stop its whaling program JARPA II and therefore cease all whaling activities in the Antarctic. Since 1987, Japan has killed over 10,000 whales in the Southern Seas.
In its decision delivered this morning, at The Hague, the Court declared that the “scientific whaling” program in Antarctica, as it has been designed and implemented by Japan, entails a disproportionate number of whales hunted and killed. According to the Court, Japan did not provide adequate explications to justify the lethal take of whales particularly minke whales. The Court pointed out that the number of whales killed under the framework of “Japanese scientific whaling” is offset by financial reasons. The product from treating whales – which is to say the commercialization of whale meat – finances the whaling campaign carried out by the factory ship the Nisshin Maru and support vessels.
Science too Lethal
The International Court of Justice ordered Japan to stop its whaling program JARPA II and therefore cease all whaling activities in the Antarctic. Since 1987, Japan has killed over 10,000 whales in the Southern Seas.
In its decision delivered this morning, at The Hague, the Court declared that the “scientific whaling” program in Antarctica, as it has been designed and implemented by Japan, entails a disproportionate number of whales hunted and killed. According to the Court, Japan did not provide adequate explications to justify the lethal take of whales particularly minke whales. The Court pointed out that the number of whales killed under the framework of “Japanese scientific whaling” is offset by financial reasons. The product from treating whales – which is to say the commercialization of whale meat – finances the whaling campaign carried out by the factory ship the Nisshin Maru and support vessels.
Not on the Same Whale Wave
Information note N°8
Whales at the International Court of Justice
The Hague, The Netherlands, 2nd hearing of Japan, July 15th – 16th
Over the last 3 weeks, at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands), the past and the future of whaling has been explored in all its scope. In their closing remarks on July 16th, Japan implied that if the Court declared a decision in favour of Australia’s case, it would be the equivalent of forcing a State to abide to a decision that they did not agree to. On this note they reemphasized that when they agreed to the 1982 moratorium, which came into force for Japan in 1986, it was uniquely in light of this provision being reviewed. If Japan was to wake up one morning and find that the Convention that they agreed on had changed over night then the only way out would be to leave.
Not on the Same Whale Wave
Information note n°8
Whales at the International Court of Justice
The Hague, The Netherlands, 2nd hearing of Japan, July 15th – 16th
Over the last 3 weeks, at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands), the past and the future of whaling has been explored in all its scope. In their closing remarks on July 16th, Japan implied that if the Court declared a decision in favour of Australia’s case, it would be the equivalent of forcing a State to abide to a decision that they did not agree to. On this note they reemphasized that when they agreed to the 1982 moratorium, which came into force for Japan in 1986, it was uniquely in light of this provision being reviewed. If Japan was to wake up one morning and find that the Convention that they agreed on had changed over night then the only way out would be to leave.
Australia: Fights Back
Information note n°7
Whales at the International Court of Justice
The Hague, The Netherlands, 2nd hearing of Australia, July 9th – 10th
The second round of hearings for Australia was presented from July 9th to July 10th and announced a call to order in the Court by the Attorney-General of Australia, Marc Dreyfus. Australia’s return to the stand signalled the return, in force, of clear legal arguments. Australia restated that their case was “about the failure of one country to comply with its international legal obligations not to conduct commercial whaling, an obligation which that country accepted voluntarily but then immediately began to subvert.” Australia also hammered down the unfounded arguments that Japan had unjustly presented against them in their first round of hearings.
