Whaling in the Antarctic: Australia vs. Japan (with New Zealand intervening) - Lecture Notes

Presenter

• Amanda Tilly at St. Petersburg College
• Course: Legal Ethical Issues and Veterinary Technology

Overview

• Definitions
• History of Whaling
  • International Whaling Commission (IWC)
  • Whaling in Australia
  • Whaling in Japan
• Case Synopsis
• Arguments and Defenses
  • Australia’s Arguments
  • Japan’s Defense
• Court Ruling and Judgment
• Reflection

Key Definitions

• IWC: International Whaling Commission
• Moratorium: Suspension/ending
• JARPA II: Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic, Phase II
• ICRW: International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
• Article 8: Allows for killing of whales for scientific purposes
• ICJ: International Court of Justice

What is Whaling?

• Hunting of whales for meat or oil
• Practiced by Norway, Iceland, and Japan for ~4,000 years
• Uses:
  • Meat for food
  • Blubber for oil lamps
  • Bone for corsets, hoop skirts, tools
  • Baleen for baskets

International Whaling Commission (IWC)

• Founded in 1946 to prevent whale extinction by regulating whaling
• 1986: Moratorium on commercial whaling; introduced scientific research permitting
• Sanctuaries Established:
  • 1979: Indian Ocean
  • 1994: Surrounding Antarctic Ocean

Whaling in Australia

• Began in late 18th century
• Early 19th century: major industry with advanced technologies (harpoon guns, steam engines)
• Decline due to falling whale populations; industry collapse
• 1978: End of commercial whaling
• 1979: Anti-whaling policy; focus on IWC and international conservation
• Active in multiple IWC committees

Whaling in Japan

• Practiced small-scale whaling for centuries; commercial whaling popular in late 17th century
• Joined IWC in 1951, opposed commercial whaling suspension (1982), retracted objections in 1985
• 1988: Acquired special permits for scientific research whaling
• Average harvest: 1800 whales annually; samples sent to labs
• 2005: Created JARPA II—plan to cull 1000 whales annually for 16 years

Case Synopsis

• Australia vs. Japan: Filed application to ICJ on May 31, 2010
• Claims: Japan exploiting loophole in moratorium, abusing special permits, waling in Southern Ocean Sanctuary
• Argument: Whether special permits qualify under Article 8; JARPA II's legality

Australia’s Arguments

• Breach of obligations under ICRW
  • Zero catch limit for commercial whaling
  • No commercial whaling of fin whales in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary
  • Ban on factory ships and whale catchers linked to factory ships
• JARPA II not used for scientific purposes as per Article 8

Japan’s Defense

• ICJ had no jurisdiction over the claim
• Claimed JARPA II area was high seas, not sanctuary property
• JARPA II: 18-year research exempt from Article 8 constraints

Court Ruling and Judgment

• ICJ has jurisdiction over the application from Australia
• New Zealand’s application to intervene was valid
• Ruling:
  • JARPA II’s design/implementation not reasonable/relevant to scientific objectives
  • Data collected insufficient
  • JARPA II isolated findings
  • JARPA II violated ICRW in Southern Ocean Sanctuary
• Judgment: Japan must revoke all permits/licenses related to JARPA II; no future permits under Article 8 for JARPA II
• ICJ acknowledges divergent global views on whaling
• ICJ abstains from defining 'scientific research'

Reflection

• Judgment favorable for whales, sanctuary, IWC, Australia, and New Zealand
• Significant for future environmental protection and conservation rulings
• Update: July 2019—Japan withdrew from IWC, likely to avoid IWC regulations
• Overall positive outcome for the case