Whaling in the Antarctic: Australia vs. Japan Lecture Notes

Jun 26, 2024

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