Science friction: Antarctic research whaling and the International Court of Justice
Whaling remains one of the most controversial and divisive aspects of the modern regulation of marine resources. In 1982, the International Whaling Commission, the global management body responsible for the regulation of whale stocks, instituted a moratorium on commercial hunting, which has been in...
| Published in: | Journal of Environmental Law |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/95187/ https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/equ018 |
| Summary: | Whaling remains one of the most controversial and divisive aspects of the modern regulation of marine resources. In 1982, the International Whaling Commission, the global management body responsible for the regulation of whale stocks, instituted a moratorium on commercial hunting, which has been in force for almost 20 years. Nevertheless, a number of legal avenues exist within the current international regulatory framework to facilitate a degree of continued hunting. The most contentious of these is the scientific research exemption advanced under Article VIII of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling 1946, which provides for the national authorization of permits for lethal research. Japan has undertaken a significant programme of scientific whaling in Antarctica since 1987, despite widespread international criticism and an escalating campaign of nautical obstruction by militant activists, duly generating a long-standing legal dispute with Australia. On 31 March 2014, judgment was rendered by the International Court of Justice, in favour of Australia, ordering Japan to cease and desist its Antarctic whaling programme and refuting Japanese assertions that these activities had been legitimately conducted ‘for the purposes of scientific research’ as permitted under the 1946 Convention. |
|---|