00:00The Antarctic whaling case, Australia-Ce.
00:02Japan, New Zealand, intervening, is a major ruling issued by the International Court of Justice, ICC, on March 31, 2014.
00:11This legal dispute concerns the interpretation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.
00:17from 1946, CIR-CB,
00:19and on the border between scientific research and disguised commercial hunting.
00:23The context and origins of the dispute: In 1982, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) adopted a global moratorium on whaling.
00:31Commercial whaling, which came into effect in 1986.
00:34To circumvent this prohibition while remaining bound by the Convention, Japan relied on Article 8
00:40of the CIR-CB.
00:42This article authorizes Member States to issue special permits to kill and process whales for purposes
00:47scientific research.
00:48From 1987, Tokyo launched the JARPA program, then its second phase in 2005, JARPA 2.
00:55Under the guise of this scientific program, hundreds of minke whales were taken each year from the
01:01'Southern Ocean,
01:02and the meat was then sold on the Japanese market.
01:05Faced with the continued increase in slaughter quotas and the environmental impact in the Antarctic sanctuary,
01:10Australia filed a complaint against Japan with the IGC in May 2010, later joined by New Zealand
01:15-Zeeland.
01:15The arguments of the Australian parties maintained that JARPA 2 was a disguised commercial enterprise violating the moratorium of the
01:22CBI,
01:22the creation of the Southern Ocean sanctuary and the freezing of commercial catches.
01:27Canberra claimed that the program lacked scientific rigor.
01:30that he used lethal methods without justification and that his real objectives were industrial and commercial in nature.
01:35Japan countered that the program fell under its sovereign right to grant permits pursuant to Article 8.
01:41He argued that slaughter was essential for collecting biological data, age, diet, stock status,
01:48in order to prepare for sustainable fisheries management.
01:50According to Tokyo, the sale of the meat was merely a legal obligation stemming from the treaty in order to avoid waste.
01:55the sockets.
01:56The reasoning and decision of the IGC.
01:59To reach a decision, the IGC avoided defining "science" in abstract terms.
02:03Instead, she developed an objective, two-step test.
02:06Do the activities involve the use of scientific methods?
02:09Are the project and the implementation of the program reasonable in light of these stated scientific objectives?
02:14The Court noted serious inconsistencies in the implementation of JARPA 2.
02:18The harvest quotas had increased dramatically without credible scientific justification.
02:24Japan had not sufficiently studied the possibility of using non-lethal methods, such as skin biopsies and satellite tracking.
02:31The actual sampling rate was well below the set targets, but this did not affect the scientific program.
02:36proving that the capture figures were arbitrary.
02:39By a vote of twelve to four, the Court concluded that the permits issued under JARPA 2 were not
02:44not, for scientific research purposes, within the meaning of Article 8.
02:48Consequently, it orders Japan to cancel existing permits and refrain from issuing new ones.
02:53within the framework of this program.
02:56The consequences of the ruling
02:57Japan complied with the ruling by ending the JARPA 2 program in Antarctica.
03:01However, after unsuccessfully attempting to reform the IBC from within, Tokyo eventually withdrew from the Commission
03:07international whaling in 2019.
03:10The country has ceased all whaling in the Antarctic, but has officially resumed commercial whaling exclusively in its waters.
03:15territorial and its exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
03:19THANKS.
03:20THANKS.
03:24THANKS.
03:25THANKS.
03:25THANKS.
03:26THANKS.
03:26THANKS.
03:26THANKS.
