UN Court: Japanese Whaling "Not Scientific"

First time accepted submitter Nodsnarb (2851527) writes "The UN's international Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that Japan's Antarctic whaling program is not for scientific purposes. In a statement, the court said that Japan's programme involved activities which 'can broadly be characterised as scientific research.' However, it said that 'the evidence does not establish that the programme's design and implementation are reasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives.' It added: 'The court concludes that the special permits granted by Japan for the killing, taking and treating of whales in connection with JARPA II are not 'for purposes of scientific research' pursuant to [the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling].'"

Comments

It all winds up on a dinner table

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

So I'm shocked....just shocked, I say, that there was no scientific objective .

Perhaps the science part was developing more efficient harpoons.

Re:It all winds up on a dinner table

[Dogtanian]

I've tasted whale, it isn't tasty.

Apparently most younger Japanese aren't much into it themselves either, and the "tradition" isn't, really. From this report:-

For [Mitoshi Noguchi] there is nothing wrong with eating whale, it reminds him of school lunch.

"When we were growing up we didn't have ample supply of food, so this was meat for us, our protein," he says. "So when we eat it now it's very reminiscent. It's delicious."

Mr Noguchi is in late middle age, but on the same table is one of his much younger colleagues, Yoshitaka Takayanagi, born after the meat was phased out in Japanese schools. Few Japanese eat whale regularly these days, especially the young, and he has only eaten it twice before.

This covers the phenomenon in general in more depth:-

So why does Japan exert so much diplomatic effort on this issue? The official line is that whaling is an integral part of Japanese culture, a practice dating back hundreds of years.

That isn't quite true. A few coastal communities, like Wakayama, have been hunting whales for centuries, traditionally with hand-held harpoons.

But the rest of Japan only became familiar with eating whale during the 20th Century, as modern ships with harpoon-guns became available. Whale meat was especially widespread in the difficult years after the Second World War, when it was seen as a cheap source of protein.

But as incomes rose, people switched to imported beef, or fish like tuna and salmon. With such an abundance of high-quality protein available these days, few Japanese see the point in eating whale, which doesn't taste that special.

There are other reasons for Japan's determined campaign.

"If the current ban on hunting whales is allowed to become permanent," says Hideki Moronuki, at the Fisheries Agency, the government department leading the campaign, "activists may direct their efforts to restricting other types of fishing."

As Japan consumes more fish than any other nation, it worries about possible curbs on its fishing activities in open seas for species like tuna.

Officials also like to claim that whales damage fish stocks because of the quantities they eat, although this is largely dismissed by scientists in the rest of the world.

But perhaps the biggest factor is resentment of being told by other countries what Japan can and cannot do.

"Why do people in the west make such a big deal about our very limited hunting of whales?" asks Hideki Moronuki.

"How would they feel if we told Americans they couldn't hunt deer, or if we told Australians to stop hunting kangaroos?"

Re:Japan, a land filled with lies !

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

As opposed to those other countries, that haven't invented 'using euphemisms to evade established law' yet?

I'll be right back, the illegal enemy combatants in administrative detention are causing trouble again.

Zero Fin

[Sponge Bath]

Somebody set up us the harpoon.
All your whale are belong to us.
For great justice.

Re:Excellent, but ....

[Anonymous Coward]

How will the UN enforce this? This is nothing more than a symbolic gesture as I don't think sanctions are likely to hurt Japan all that much.

Japan has agreed to abide by the UN courts rulings, which have asked for am immediate stop to the practice

Re:Excellent, but ....

[circletimessquare]

You're absolutely correct, but hypocrisy has never stood in the way of politics

Re:Excellent, but ....

[Xest]

It's not so much how the UN can enforce it, it's the fact that it makes it legal for other countries to take action against Japan over it without themselves becoming victims of legal cases from Japan.

For example, Japanese ships entered New Zealand's exclusive economic zone earlier this year - something boats are normally allowed to do without needing explicit permission. Now however there's nothing to stop the New Zealand coast guard from arresting them and seizing their ship for carrying out an illegal activity if they were to pass through that zone again. Effectively Japan could no longer call such act an act of piracy which would be the risk of New Zealand or similar decided to go ahead and do that without this ruling.

This is why Japan has said it will abide by the ruling, because whilst it's embarassing for them to lose their whaling argument at long last, it'd be even more embarassing if they said "fuck the UN" and then got their ships legally seized by a foreign government and the Japanese crew paraded on TV as arrested for engaging in illegal activity. They'd then have to stop whaling for the reason that their ships had been seized, rather than that they'd accepted the ruling and given it up themselves - this is the least embarrassing route for them now, hence why they're taking it.

Re:Buried the lede

[Xest]

Yes, the problem is for it to work you need civilised nations that actually listen. Unfortunately that doesn't apply to any of those you listed (and I add my own nation to the list - the UK).

Getting Putin to listen though when he's off on a paranoid rant about how the EU wants to make him eat croissants is a no-go, much less Kim Jong Un who actually thinks he's a good leader and the whole of the rest of the world is always wrong about everything.

This is one of those rare occasions where it's actually worked because the loser has accepted the ruling rather than saying "Okay, I lost, but I don't care, I'm going to carry on as I was anyway" or alternatively, "Fuck that, I'm not even going to go to that court because deep down I know I'm wrong and know I'll lose", the latter of which is what Argentina has done each time the UK has offered to let the court rule on the Falklands for example.

Re:Japan, a land filled with lies !

[quenda]

There is an east-west cultural difference here.

In the West, we have "plausible deniability", where we can't be 100% sure they knew they were telling lies.

In the East, a plain-as-day outright lie is more polite than saying "no, we withdraw from your treaty.".