UN court rules against Japan whaling

[Lasher]

Last edited Mon Mar 31, 2014, 09:12 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: Aljazeera

The UN's top court has ordered Japan to stop its annual whale hunt in the Antarctic, rejecting Tokyo's argument that it is for scientific purposes, in an emotive case activists said was make-or-break for the giant mammal's future.

"Japan shall revoke any existant authorisation, permit or licence granted in relation to Jarpa II [research programme] and refrain from granting any further permits in pursuance to the programme," the International Court of Justice's Judge Peter Tomka said on Monday.

Australia hauled Japan to the ICJ in an attempt to torpedo whale hunting in the Southern Ocean, a practice Canberra says is a thinly-disguised commercial exploit under a cover of scientific research.

While Norway and Iceland have commercial whaling programmes in spite of a 1986 International Whaling Commission (IWC) moratorium, Japan insists its programme is scientific, while admitting that the resulting meat ends up on plates back home.

Read more: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2014/03/un-court-rule-legality-japan-whaling-20143315380190868.html

---

Good news, a long time coming. Edit to add:

Japan accepts court ban on Antarctic whaling

The UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that Japan must temporarily halt its whaling programme in the Antarctic.

It agreed with Australia, which brought the case in May 2010, that the programme was not for scientific research as claimed by Tokyo.

Japan said it would abide by the decision but added it "regrets and is deeply disappointed by the decision".

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26818863

[In_The_Wind]

1. Excellent!

[Omaha Steve]

2. Thank you to the court

K&R!

[groundloop]

3. Is this the last word, or can this ruling be appealed?

Obviously Japan could potentially just chose to ignore the ruling and keep whaling, but at some point you'd think international pressure (especially after this ruling) would shame them to stop.

[Fred Sanders]

4. Essentially not appealable.

Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the Court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action. There are obvious problems with such a method of enforcement. If the judgment is against one of the permanent five members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement would then be vetoed. This occurred, for example, after the Nicaragua case, when Nicaragua brought the issue of the U.S.'s non-compliance with the Court's decision before the Security Council.[5] Furthermore, if the Security Council refuses to enforce a judgment against any other state, there is no method of forcing the state to comply. Furthermore, the most effective form to take action for the Security Council, coercive action under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, can be justified only if international peace and security are at stake. The Security Council has never done this so far.

[Lasher]

9. And there's the problem with Norway and Iceland.

They have commercial whaling programs and they don't try to pass them off as research. If they can continue, then why can't Japan?

[7962]

10. Still? Wow, i didnt know about them. Jeeze.

[Lasher]

12. Japan has said just now that they will abide by this court decision.

So that issue is settled. I edited the OP to include that information.

[groundloop]

18. I guess I'm mildly optimistic, but will believe it when I see it happen

That is good news, and I'm inclined to believe that the fact Japan has made that statement is a very positive sign. Still, their words need to be followed up with deeds.

And of course this might just be a practical matter for them as well in that Sea Shepherd could be making it prohibitively expensive to continue whaling.

[Jgarrick]

19. Whale was one of the dishes in a multi-course meal I had in Iceland recently.

I tried it, largely out of curiosity. My conclusion was that whales are, when cooked properly, delicious.

(It was minke whale, which is not the least bit endangered)

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. It describes it as the 'top court', and I don't know of any appeal possible

Even if Japan does withdraw from the previous conventions, this should also make it easier to stop them whaling in any waters where there's either a territorial claim, or an international agreement - eg Antarctica.

[kristopher]

21. There are 4 options I see

The court ordered Japan to halt any issuing of whaling permits at least until the program has been thoroughly revamped.
Japanese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman Noriyuki Shikata told reporters that the country "regrets and is deeply disappointed" by the decision.
But "as a state that respects the rule of law ... and as a responsible member of the global community, Japan will abide by the ruling of the court," he said.

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2023267093_apxworldcourtjapanaustralia.html

They can stop whaling.
They can continue whaling in Northern waters.
They can redesign their protocol and resume whaling.
They can resign from the IWC and resume whaling anywhere in international waters.

The Southern Sanctuary was established by the International Whaling Commission; and I believe its umbrella of authority is limited to its members. The statement by Japan's spokesman indicates they don't plan to pursue this path, but if Japan chooses to withdraw from the IWC they are not bound by the edicts of that body. Iceland and Norway are an example of one path available, where they were given whaling quotas in exchange for not shattering the IWC.

Link to International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
http://iwc.int/convention#nine

It's hard to predict what they are going to do. The Abe government is hard-right on a lot of issues, and traditionally that might be expected to result in them staking out a very defensive posture on the issue of whaling since it has been driven largely by RW nationalistic sentiment. However another possibility is that their pursuit of the rightwing agenda in other areas might give Abe room with the nationalists to leave behind a policy that is far too expensive in terms of both money and international prestige. Let's hope that is the case.

[narnian60]

5. Hooray!!!! nt

[DirkGently]

7. Excellent. Scientific research my ass.

[Number9Dream]

8. Would Australian Navy enforce this ban?

This is good news.

If Japan choses to continue whaling, any thoughts on whether Australia will send naval ships to stop poaching? Has Canberra said anything regarding enforcement?

[Lasher]

13. Japan has agreed to abide by this court decision.

So that appears to be settled.

[bkanderson76]

11. Very Good....Keep your bloody little hands off my whales.

[littlewolf]

14. on the down side DSC channel will have to

find something to replace whale wars .....

[Lasher]

17. Maybe they'll start filming in Norway and Iceland now.

Or they could go fight with the folks on Wicked Tuna. That would be epic!

[Generic Other]

15. And next we stop them from killing dolphins

No more slaughter of innocents.

[Lurks Often]

16. Outstanding!!

Good news on a Monday morning!

[Coventina]

20. The best part is Japan is grudgingly going to comply.

Although, I think this is one of those "trust but verify" situations.

Now, time to focus on Iceland and Norway.....