national

Australia hopeful of Japan whaling ruling by int'l court this year

26 Comments
By Harumi Ozawa

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

© 2013 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments
Login to comment

The meat used in Scientific Research is meant to be on a frying pan. So it's not a loophole. Japan is not counting whales for the sake of counting. They are counting whales in order to calculate how many whales they can put on a frying pan.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

shanabelleMay. 30, 2013 - 12:01AM JST and whatever the ruling turns out to be, it will be duly ignored by Japan.

Japan is a signatory to an agreement wherein it has agreed to abide by ICJ judgments. Therefore your comment is utterly erroneous.

DisillusionedMay. 30, 2013 - 01:07AM JST "Ossanamerica - Neither even touch on Japan "eating whales"

I didn't mention anything about eating whales either!

Then what "Japanese culture" were you referring to?

I stated the Japanese defense is contrary to the charter of the IWC, which is part of Australia's case.

That's quite a remarkable statement considering that Japan hasn't yet presented it's "defense".

The Japanese hunt whales to research the viability of commercial whaling and the IWC was set up to stop >commercial whaling. A five year old can see the contradiction there, even if you can't. Furthermore, the sympathy ploy >of 'we have a whaling culture' will not fly in the international court. Japan has no defense and will lose!

I suggest you actually read the IWC website to learn what the IWC was created for, what the Scientific Committee is for, and what Research Whaling under Article VIII is all about. Your understanding of the facts is so far off that it does not warrant a discussion.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Disillusioned,

The Japanese hunt whales to research the viability of commercial whaling and the IWC was set up to stop commercial whaling. A five year old can see the contradiction there

I hope Australia takes your argument to the court.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Could we please all agree that this is NOT the case:

"the IWC was set up to stop commercial whaling."

If you think it is, please go back and read the IWC charter, and then we can have an informed discussion.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The issue in front of ICJ is research whaling. Japan says it is research whaling. Australia says it is not. IWC says it is. So, Japan will win the case.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

@C3CHO actually wikipedia says :The Antarctic minke whale is currently considered Data Deficient by the IUCN red list. Which means they don't know. It also says that the estimated population is 515000. The point being there is no legitimate reason for Japan to hunt whales anymore. It should stop.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I stated the Japanese defense is contrary to the charter of the IWC, which is part of Australia's case.

the Convention states that its intention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry. (IWC)

Australia have gone on record as saying that they are and always will be against whaling. So who is contrary to the charter of the IWC?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

New Zealand and Australia continue to flog a dead horse. So far the old nag has twitched a couple of times, but now the flies are starting to gather.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The Japanese hunt whales to research the viability of commercial whaling and the IWC was set up to stop commercial whaling.

That is incorrect, the IWC was set up to "provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry". Research into whether or not whale hunting can be sustainable or not is directly related to their mission.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Ossanamerica - Neither even touch on Japan "eating whales"

I didn't mention anything about eating whales either! I stated the Japanese defense is contrary to the charter of the IWC, which is part of Australia's case. The Japanese hunt whales to research the viability of commercial whaling and the IWC was set up to stop commercial whaling. A five year old can see the contradiction there, even if you can't. Furthermore, the sympathy ploy of 'we have a whaling culture' will not fly in the international court. Japan has no defense and will lose!

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

and whatever the ruling turns out to be, it will be duly ignored by Japan.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

i eat whales with gusto. Go get your own food.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

In a court of law the term "loophole" does not exist. Either the Research Whaling is being done in accordance with the IWC regulations, or it isn't. Whether the Japanese eat the whales or not will not an issue, nor will how long they take or not take to die when harpooned.

DisillusionedMay. 29, 2013 - 08:01PM JST Japan has already lost! Every time they justify their 'research' with Japan's whaling culture they drive the nails in >deeper.

Have you actually read Austraia's ICJ complaint? Have you read New Zealands' intervention? Neither even touch on Japan "eating whales". Hence, Japan will not be answering anything regarding "eating whales".

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Japan has already lost! Every time they justify their 'research' with Japan's whaling culture they drive the nails in deeper. They then turn around and openly state their reader h is to prove commercial whaling is viable, but that is totally contrary to the IWC charter they are using to hunt whales. Their own contradictions and admissions have already blown their case

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Allowing whaler-hunting in the name of scientific research becoz there is a loophole in the international moratorium??? FIX THE BLOODY LOOPHOLE THEN!!!

PATHETIC EXCUSE!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Matthew Simon,

I hope they do rule against Japan in this case

No one would doubt you hope so.

However, ICJ is a court. Court deals with Law, not with your hopes. Anti-whalers should understand that whaling agreement and laws made long ago would not magically change just because they wish it would be so.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Matthew Simon

Japan continuing its whaling on a animal that has been driven to the brink of extinction

No. This kind of lies by extremists makes the argument unscientific and name calling of Japan. Minke whales are by no means endangered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minke_whale

Concervation Status: Least Concern

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Kiyoshi I wasn't aware that the fish in the ocean or whales belonged to anyone but themselves. We as humans need to start realizing that we are part of the environment not lords over it. Japan continuing its whaling on a animal that has been driven to the brink of extinction because of its fabricated need for the meat should be stopped. At least when you look at whalers like the Inuits in the North they are taking only a few and actually have a legitimate cultural tie to whaling. The are also hunting using traditional methods. The second they tried to bring a bunch of modern whaling vessels in and hunt like Japan does today their legitimacy would evaporate. I hope they do rule against Japan in this case and end this needless hunt.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Asked whether that would mean a ruling before Japan’s hunt, conducted under a “scientific research” loophole in the international moratorium on whaling, could resume in December in the Southern Ocean she said: “That’s our hope.”

I hope Australia will cease complaining about legal activity of Japan once the ICJ makes such decision. How can Japan lose? Even IWC scientific committee itself uses data collected by Japan. Such data cannot be proved to not exist by Australia. Unless Australia can prove IWC scientific committee is not doing scientific activity, Japan can not lose.

Australia can finally learn what IWC stands for. The W is Whaling.

According to the latest figures reported to the Senate Tuesday, Australia has already spent almost A$20.5 million on its international court case against Japan.

For domestic political purpose. Waste of Australians' money, and they waste Japanese taxpayers money by doing so. Shameful.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

@ kiyoshMukai - how dare they eat "our" fish! Those whales are so thoughtless...

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Nah. POlitics, nationalism, natural spirit aside. Whales eat our fish and this 2000 yearly will not send them into extinction

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

They are not even sure how long whales live.

For up to an hour (sometimes more) after the harpoon explodes inside their body.

0 ( +7 / -6 )

IWC admits that it's a research whaling??? Can we ask IWC to post the results of years of scientific research?? What is exactely learned by this scientific research?? NOTHING!!! They are not even sure how long whales live.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Japans hunt, conducted under a scientific research loophole

Tokyo defends the practice, saying eating whale is a culinary tradition.

Well which one is it?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

@ CH3CHO

I thnk you have made the call too soon. Let's wait for the ICJ decision.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan will win the case for Australia has no ground to stand. IWC itself admits Japanese research whaling is indeed research whaling. If New Zealand had not intervened, the ruling would have been delivered earlier. If the judgment is delayed, Australia should blame New Zealand.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

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