Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan

This article has as its objective the analysis of the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case “Whaling in the Antarctic”, Australia v. Japan (New Zealand Intervenor), particularly in respect to how it arose, the development of the controversy and how the case would become a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional - ACDI
Main Author: Fernando Villamizar Lamus
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Spanish
French
Published: Universidad del Rosario 2016
Subjects:
Law
K
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03
https://doaj.org/article/00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12 2023-05-15T13:30:32+02:00 Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan Fernando Villamizar Lamus 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03 https://doaj.org/article/00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12 EN ES FR eng spa fre Universidad del Rosario http://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/acdi/article/view/4493 https://doaj.org/toc/2027-1131 https://doaj.org/toc/2145-4493 2027-1131 2145-4493 doi:10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03 https://doaj.org/article/00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12 ACDI: Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional, Vol 9, Iss 0, Pp 81-112 (2016) caza de ballenas en la Antártida Corte Internacional de Justicia rol de los peritos estándar de revisión artículo viii Convención Internacional para la Regulación de la Caza de Ballenas Law K article 2016 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03 2022-12-31T04:41:06Z This article has as its objective the analysis of the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case “Whaling in the Antarctic”, Australia v. Japan (New Zealand Intervenor), particularly in respect to how it arose, the development of the controversy and how the case would become a milestone in the role of experts in cases brought before the ICJ because, with the posture taken to avoid non-transparent practices or ones which could affect proper processes. It also analyzes the standard of review set by the ICJ for the determination of what is or is not science. It demonstrates how this standard could allow inconsistencies which could arise in the decision itself, and suggests other, more precise, methods considered by the ICJ which could overcome the problems of this standard of revision Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctic Antártida Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Antarctic Ballenas ENVELOPE(-64.167,-64.167,-65.183,-65.183) New Zealand The Antarctic Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional - ACDI 9 1 81 112
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language English
Spanish
French
topic caza de ballenas en la Antártida
Corte Internacional de Justicia
rol de los peritos
estándar de revisión
artículo viii Convención Internacional para la Regulación de la Caza de Ballenas
Law
K
spellingShingle caza de ballenas en la Antártida
Corte Internacional de Justicia
rol de los peritos
estándar de revisión
artículo viii Convención Internacional para la Regulación de la Caza de Ballenas
Law
K
Fernando Villamizar Lamus
Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
topic_facet caza de ballenas en la Antártida
Corte Internacional de Justicia
rol de los peritos
estándar de revisión
artículo viii Convención Internacional para la Regulación de la Caza de Ballenas
Law
K
description This article has as its objective the analysis of the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case “Whaling in the Antarctic”, Australia v. Japan (New Zealand Intervenor), particularly in respect to how it arose, the development of the controversy and how the case would become a milestone in the role of experts in cases brought before the ICJ because, with the posture taken to avoid non-transparent practices or ones which could affect proper processes. It also analyzes the standard of review set by the ICJ for the determination of what is or is not science. It demonstrates how this standard could allow inconsistencies which could arise in the decision itself, and suggests other, more precise, methods considered by the ICJ which could overcome the problems of this standard of revision
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Fernando Villamizar Lamus
author_facet Fernando Villamizar Lamus
author_sort Fernando Villamizar Lamus
title Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
title_short Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
title_full Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
title_fullStr Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
title_full_unstemmed Commentaries on the Decision in the Case “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia v. Japan
title_sort commentaries on the decision in the case “whaling in the antárctic”, australia v. japan
publisher Universidad del Rosario
publishDate 2016
url https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03
https://doaj.org/article/00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12
long_lat ENVELOPE(-64.167,-64.167,-65.183,-65.183)
geographic Antarctic
Ballenas
New Zealand
The Antarctic
geographic_facet Antarctic
Ballenas
New Zealand
The Antarctic
genre Antarc*
Antarctic
Antártida
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctic
Antártida
op_source ACDI: Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional, Vol 9, Iss 0, Pp 81-112 (2016)
op_relation http://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/acdi/article/view/4493
https://doaj.org/toc/2027-1131
https://doaj.org/toc/2145-4493
2027-1131
2145-4493
doi:10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03
https://doaj.org/article/00b4413f4e664333ba3cedef1bc99e12
op_doi https://doi.org/10.12804/acdi9.1.2016.03
container_title Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional - ACDI
container_volume 9
container_issue 1
container_start_page 81
op_container_end_page 112
_version_ 1766009727064473600