Japan Today
crime

Denmark awaits Japan's extradition request for anti-whaling activist

66 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2024 AFP

©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.

66 Comments
Login to comment

This should turn out to be quite interesting.

If he is actually extradited to Japan the (embarrassing) justice system here will be fodder for the worlds media.

-4 ( +17 / -21 )

And for the moment, they are still waiting to hear from Japan.

Japan still hold endless internal meeting .

-14 ( +9 / -23 )

It's unclear to me what the larger goal here is for Japan. If a 73 year old Watson gets locked up in Japan I can see others taking up his cause and viewing him as a martyr.

-1 ( +14 / -15 )

My guess is that Paul Watson will be released and extradition denied, because Denmark doesn't want to get the flak for aiding in the persecution of a whale rights activist from EU.

As you know most EU countries are anti-whaling.

-13 ( +12 / -25 )

Anyone charged with acts of terrorism on the high seas should be tried. That is recognized as a crime anywhere. Whaling or non-whaling is not the issue. Watson will be extradited.

0 ( +16 / -16 )

What are the Japanese authorities waiting for? Justice must be done. If released with no punishment, it will only encourage the old scum to engage in more dangerous activities against the Japanese whaler in the North Pacific.

6 ( +17 / -11 )

Watson will be extradited

Now that's a sweeping statement that jumps to a conclusion.

If the article was read in full, certain European countries are already opposing any extradition and celebrities are swinging to his defense.

This vindictive act will be a PR disaster for Japan and highlight their cruel, nonsensical whale butchering industry.

-13 ( +6 / -19 )

Without a doubt Japan will ask for it in extradition..

Their country, their rules..

Better for Watson if start some basic Japanese Language lessons..

Maybe here he reconsider his actions and start to like the taste of クジラ..

LOL

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

OssanAmerica...what about "crimes on the LOW seas "? lol.

Does saying "high seas " add anything to your comment ?

Tricky one for Denmark....the "hostage justice " system in Japan will be foremost in judicial thinking.

Denmark, a modern country, probably would'nt extradite to a country where a fair trial is a rarity.

My money is on "no extradition "....maybe some wiggle room for Denmark to impose some penalty like seizing the ship.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

You people still dont get it do you?

Extradition between nations is based on comity. That means that if whatever crime a person is charged with is a crime in another country, then it will be recognized as a crime and extradition will take place. Usually facilitated by existing Extradition Treaties. But can be obtained through the court system even if it does npt exist.

Let me make it simple. You get arrested for pot posession in Japan. You sneak out of Japan in a box and go back to the US. You get snagged in your home state because Japan issued an international arrest warrant. But your lawyer will get you off scott free cause posession of marijuana is not a crime in your jurisdiction. Of course you will not be able to get back into Japan for some time.

Watson is wanted on acts of terrorism and piracy. His position on whaling one way or the other is irrelevant. So is the Japanese justice system. So hes, he will get extradited unless acts of terrorism and piracy are not crimes under Danish law.

5 ( +12 / -7 )

Without a doubt Japan will ask for it in extradition..

And if Denmark denies the extradition request?

Their country, their rules..

Right.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

The Kingdom of Denmark is a great ally of Japan and a big believer in Rule of Law. There is no doubt they will extradite Watson to Japan where he will be enemy number one!

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

@OssanJapan

That means that if whatever crime a person is charged with is a crime in another country, 

Except in this case it can be argued that it's the Japanese whaling ships that are committing crimes under international maritime law and Paul Watson was doing the righteous thing.

A person trying to stop a crime taking place at high sea is not a crime, thus mutual criminality doesn't establish, Paul Watson is released and is celebrated as a hero while Japan is once again mocked by Europe as committing crimes under International commercial whaling ban convention.

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Put this guy in jail. He's committed numerous violent acts on the high seas -- and he's not going to be happy, apparently, until he kills someone.

In America under its current presidential regime, which deserves to be unseated in a few months, you can get several years in federal prison for making a woman swerve around you on the sidewalk to enter a "clinic" where she pays someone to kill her unborn child.

But Brigit Bardot thinks it's okay for a man to harm other human beings and risk their lives -- to "save the whales"?

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

Watson is wanted on acts of terrorism and piracy. His position on whaling one way or the other is irrelevant. So is the Japanese justice system. So hes, he will get extradited unless acts of terrorism and piracy are not crimes under Danish law.

Denmark allows the slaughter of right whales and dolphins during the summer months on the Faroe Islands. i don't expect them to release Paul Watson. There is in fact a movement to boycott tourism of the Faroe Islands because of their slaughter of whales and dolphins. Sadly I think Denmark is going to support the Japanese on this matter and extradite him.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

There is no way Denmark, an EU country, will extradite someone to Japan to be victimized by their feudal hostage 'justice' system.

Will not happen. Particularly such a naked political persecution such as this.

-10 ( +4 / -14 )

Only when such a request was received would the ministry decide whether there were grounds to extradite, the statement added. And for the moment, they are still waiting to hear from Japan.

The Danish authorities have not even received an extradition request. And Tokyo has less than 30 days to submit one. And even if that happens an extradition is not guaranteed (in fact it most likely will not happen).

Yet that hasn't stopped certain quarters asserting he is wanted for "piracy and terrorism on the high seas".

One what basis are such outlandish statements made.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Denmark is free to deny any foreign extradition request. But to do so, despite meeting the comity standard will risk Japan denying a Danish extradktion request in the future. If an Extradition Treaty is already in place this is already a moot point.

Watsons actions for which heis charged under J-law is a crime just about anywhere. His actions were not to stop a crime as the Scientific Whaling programs he obstructed through acts of violence, while dennounced by many, were never established as Crimes outside of Australian domestic law which Watson was not authorized to enforce. Even the Australian authorities did not treat the whaling as a crime as the jurisdiction was based on a territorialclaim that was not widely recognizec by the world.

The whaling issue is irrevant to his charges, the arrest warrant and exraditiin request.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

The countries that take whales -- at least Norway (#1) and Iceland (#2) and Japan (#3) -- use quotas to regulate how many whales they take. (Japan, in fact, didn't take whales for 30 years, until 2019, while Norway and Iceland continued the practice). These countries do not go out and get as many whales as they can -- they take what they feel they need for commercial use. Other countries, like the US and China, kill more whales with plastic, chemical dumping, and other abuses of the oceans.

Regardless of all that, terrorism is terrorism, isn't it? 9/11 was terrorism, wasn't it? When does someone decide what is terrorism and what is not? It seems, in this case, to be an arbitrary thing. It's okay to use terrorism for practical purposes rather than persuasion, apparently, if you feel like it.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Government spokesman Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters in Tokyo the Coast Guard authority would "take the appropriate action" in the case, in consultation with other ministries.

Odd. The article doesn't mention he has been charged under Japanese law with anything. Indeed, the implication by cabinet secretary Hayashi is that they are now going to attempt to.

Provide a link proving that Watson has been charged by the Japanese authorities and with the offenses previously asserted.

Here's another FACT: Japan does not have an extradition treaty with Denmark.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

American-Canadian? He was born and raised in Canada.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

A person's nationality depends on which passports they hold. Some have 4-5.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Any extradition request issued by Japan should be thrown into the waste paper basket untill Japan sorts out it's disgrace of a legal system.

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

Ossan...extradition requests are often refused, by in all manner of offences.

How does your "theory " account for this ?

You seem to think extradition is inevitable.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Watson was charged under Japanese law in 2010 .

n 2012 the presiding judge of the US 9th circut ruled against Paul Watson and SSCS and ordered an injenction against them going near the Japanese whaling vessels.In his ruling the judge described Watsons actions as terrorism and of piracy. Watson fled the US that same year for fear of extradition.

In 2015 Watson was charged by Denmark for his actions against Danish whaling. Again, violations of Denmarks maritime safety laws.

So there exists the possibility that Denmark may chooses to try him first, before extraditing him to Japan .

A formal extradition treaty need not be in place for extradition to happen as the request can be obtained through the countrys court system.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

What has he been charged with?

That copy and paste related to an over decade old injunction proceeding - not criminal proceedings.

Where does it say he has been charged with piracy and terrorism on the high seas or even charged at all?

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

In 2015 Watson was charged by Denmark

This statement appears to be false.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Terrorism and piracy according to dear OA. Make him walk the plank!

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Denmark charged him with violation of Danish maritime safety law in 2015 for SSCS interference in the Faroes island whaling. THIS IS A FACT

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The term High Seas

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

The term High Seas will be found in any text books on Maritime Law as well as in commercial and navigation agreements. Way to show off ones ignorance.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

OK. Question time:

Why doesn't the article mention that or the impending prosecution of him by the Danish authorities?

What about "piracy and terrorism on the high seas"? Who has charged him with that?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

A person's nationality depends on which passports they hold. Some have 4-5.

A person's nationality does not depend on passports, it is the other way around.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Anyone charged with acts of terrorism on the high seas should be tried. That is recognized as a crime anywhere. Whaling or non-whaling is not the issue. Watson will be extradited.

Exactly!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

zibala

A person's nationality depends on which passports they hold. Some have 4-5.

A person's nationality does not depend on passports, it is the other way around.

A person's nationality depends on what citizenship they have. A passport is the proof required to show nationality.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

"Such an extradition request must be submitted no later than 30 days after the arrest."

Maybe they'll wait out the full 30 days

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It seems that the no. 1 issue related to this article is: Do Japan and Denmark have an extradition treaty?

I couldn’t find an answer, so if anyone knows, please let us know.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Norm

Today 02:13 pm JST

It seems that the no. 1 issue related to this article is: Do Japan and Denmark have an extradition treaty?

> I couldn’t find an answer, so if anyone knows, please let us know.

You mean the Denmark govt is waiting for Japan's extradition request even if they don't have an extradition treaty?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

You mean the Denmark govt is waiting for Japan's extradition request even if they don't have an extradition treaty?

Thanks. No, it’s a simple yes/no question: Do they have an actual treaty?

Can anyone provide an actual answer?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Norm - no, they don't.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Norm - no, they don't.

JJE, thanks a million.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think that will clear it up for Norm and others.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Haha odd aituation if that was true. Denmark waiting for extradition request and France lobbying to refuse said request

2 ( +3 / -1 )

JJE would like you to believe that a treaty is needed for extradition. It is not. A treaty obligates a country to abide by a request for extradition. Without a treaty countries consider extradition requests on a case by case basis, and based on their ministry of justice, in this case it's evident that Denmark will consider a request from Japan if one is submitted.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Never said that.

Clearly this will be considered on its merits. To that end, important to keep in mind that Tokyo has not submitted anything plausible yet and has less than 30 days to do so. Also, unlikely an EU state will play along with what is clearly political and feed someone to Japan's controversial justice system.

France has already indicated what it thinks of the relative merits of this.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

> JJEToday  03:23 pm JST

Never said that.

Clearly this will be considered on its merits. To that end, important to keep in mind that Tokyo has not submitted anything plausible yet and has less than 30 days to do so. Also, unlikely an EU state will play along with what is clearly political and feed someone to Japan's controversial justice system.

You're ignoring facts

Watson is accused of damaging a Japanese ship and his ship is now on its way to intercept Japan's new big whaling ship.

The vessel was on its way to "intercept" Japan's new whaling factory vessel in the North Pacific, said a statement from the Captain Paul Watson Foundation (CPWF).

Watson was arrested on the basis of an Interpol Red Notice issued in 2012, when Japan has accused him of causing damage and injury to one of its Japanese whaling ships in the Antarctic two years earlier.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Anyway regarding extradition treaty "does Japan have an extradition treaty with the eu? Is Denmark part of the eu? " are questions that may provide the answer

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

JJE

Never said that.

You said this, "Here's another FACT: Japan does not have an extradition treaty with Denmark." which implies the same to anyone who isn't an idiot.

France has already indicated what it thinks of the relative merits of this.

And France is a party to this bilateral issue because...?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Ossan America...or should I say Captain.

I just did a quick check of various maritime laws for a few countries...guess what ..."High seas " term you lovingly embrace DID NOT APPEAR

Argument sunk...on the Low Seas.

{Pirates voice } Aaaarrrggghhh me harties "

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

SamitBasu:

Except in this case it can be argued that it's the Japanese whaling ships that are committing crimes under international maritime law and Paul Watson was doing the righteous thing.

A person trying to stop a crime taking place at high sea is not a crime, thus mutual criminality doesn't establish, Paul Watson is released and is celebrated as a hero while Japan is once again mocked by Europe as committing crimes under International commercial whaling ban convention.

It doesn't work like this, and writing it in legalese doesn't make it true, LOL.

Like it or not, deadly RESEARCH was (and still is) not illegal under international law. That is resulted in some delicious bacon makes no difference whatsoever. On the other hand, endangering other (human) lives at sea is most certainly illegal, it resulted in an arrest and will result in deportation and prosecution.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

If he does get extradited, he needs to find a music box and he will be free.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Sea Sheppard! Matt Black Ship, Skull and crossbones on the wheel house but apparently not a pirate! Lock him up.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Paul Watson left the Sea Shepherd some years ago.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

France is a party to this "bilateral issue" because Denmark is ultimately a member of the EU - and it has to comply with EU law.

And the two top dogs in the EU are basically Germany and France - the former being the bagman and the latter the nuts and bolts guy. Also, he is a legal resident of France, so there's that too.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

JJE

France is a party to this "bilateral issue" because Denmark is ultimately a member of the EU - and it has to comply with EU law.

EU are basically Germany and France - the former being the bagman and the latter the nuts and bolts guy. Also, he is a legal resident of France, so there's that too.

Absolutely irrelevant. Inter-member EU law doesn't prohibit a member state from unilaterally extraditing an individual who isn't an EU citizen to a non-EU state. Watson is merely a short term EU resident (only one year), he was arrested aboard a non-EU flagged vessel, and only Canada and the U.S. can register any legal protest over his potential extradition. Denmark can do what it deems judicious and appropriate based on their relationship with Japan regardless of Brigit Bardot's hurt feelings.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

A person's nationality depends on which passports they hold.

So you realize this is incorrect.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

No.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

You'd be surprised what EU law prohibits. Fact of the matter is Macron has taken this up at the highest levels and Tokyo hasn't even filed paperwork, which speaks volumes.

Macron is “*following** the situation closely*” and “*intervening** with the Danish authorities*”, his Elysee palace office said.

Copenhagen won't tick off Paris to satisfy Tokyo's vendetta.

Clearly you want him extradited for the same reasons; I am just commenting on the likely sequence of events - that an EU member state won't extradite in a politicized case to a country with an extremely controversial justice system, and not when one of the big players in the EU has stepped right into it.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

But Japan's government, in its first comments on Watson's arrest, said Wednesday it had long been pressing countries to detain him.

Watson, the 73-year-old American-Canadian founder of activist group Sea Shepherd, was arrested on Sunday in Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory, under an international arrest warrant issued by Japan.

Other countries didn't comply with Japan's request, only Denmark did.

Why would Denmark arrest the perp under Japan's arrest warrant from a long time ago if they have no intention of extraditing him to Japan

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Like it or not, deadly RESEARCH was (and still is) not illegal under international law. 

Whaling is proscribed under international law. Japan calling it "research" doesn't change anything. It is still whaling and those so engaged are criminals under international law. To the extent that Japan supports and protects them the Japanese government is engaged in criminal activity.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I'm imagining Denmark's "custody " holding cells quite opposite to Japan's.

Comfy too.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Desert Tortoise

Whaling is proscribed under international law.

No it isn't. The International Whaling Commission, whose ironic charter is to manage conservation to enable commercial whaling, has an extra legal prohibition on commercial whaling for its members. Japan left the IWC 15 years ago precisely because the IWC has done nothing, i.e. research, to reassess or update its blanket moratorium in almost 40 years. Japan is not legally prohibited to whale commercially in international or it's own territorial waters.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

French President Emmanuel Macron's office said Tuesday that he had already asked the Danish authorities not to extradite Watson, 

Why not?

Intolerant people like Watson must be punished appropriately for their lack of diversity and empathy.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Without a doubt Japan will ask for it in extradition..

Their country, their rules..

Same reason Meng Wanzhou was detained in Canada, by the way

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan left the IWC 15 years ago precisely 

Making Japan an outlaw state. There is literally no defense for whaling. None. It is barbaric.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Desert Tortoise

Making Japan an outlaw state.

For the last time, there is no international LAW that prohibits commercial whaling. There's just a nonbinding moratorium for member nations of a club, one that includes landlocked states like Luxembourg, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, the Czech and Slovak republics who have absolutely nothing to do with whaling, which pretends to regulate and research whaling while really only pursuing an outright abolition and persecuting nations who feel that actual research will demonstrate that controlled and limited commercial whaling is viable. Now why would Japan want to voluntarily stay in an organization that clearly doesn't represent or support its interests?

There is literally no defense for whaling. None. It is barbaric.

That's just your opinion, and again it is not an illegal activity. There are plenty of people in the world who don't find whaling barbaric and choose to eat it when its available, like any other source of food. Just because you're not one of them doesn't mean you should be intolerant towards them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites