Skip to content
All articles
  • All articles
  • About whales & dolphins
  • Create healthy seas
  • End captivity
  • Fundraising
  • Green Whale
  • Prevent bycatch
  • Prevent deaths in nets
  • Stop whaling
Clear the list graphic

Clear WDC’s Amazon Wishlist for Giving Tuesday

The holiday season is knocking on our doors and Giving Tuesday is coming up soon!...
Fin whales are targeted by Icelandic whalers

Speaking truth to power – my week giving whales a voice

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting is where governments come together to make decisions about whaling...
The Codfather being good with Anvil kick feeding right next to them_0761 branded

Spout Spotters: Boater Safety Around Whales Online Course Launches

After countless hours behind the computer, bountiful snacks, and a few stress relieving walks with...
WDC team at UN Ocean conference

Give the ocean a chance – our message from the UN Ocean Conference

I'm looking out over the River Tejo in Lisbon, Portugal, reflecting on the astounding resilience...
65556ab2635fdab7b4e12265b9623d64

Stream to Sea: Orca Action Month 2022

This June was an exceptionally busy and exciting Orca Month, starting with a somewhat surprising...
We need whale poo ? WDC NA

Whales are our climate allies – meet the scientists busy proving it

At Whale and Dolphin Conservation, we're working hard to bring whales and the ocean into...

It’s Time To Breach The Snake River Dams

The Snake River dams were controversial even before they were built.  While they were still...
Nat Geo for Disney+ Luis Lamar

Five Facts About Orcas

Orcas, also known as killer whales, are one of the most recognizable and popular species...

Australia’s motivation: Japan attacks

Whilst Australia’s motivation for bringing the case on Japanese Scientific Whaling to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) may be the result of domestic public pressure, the Government of Japan seems to have a more sceptical perspective.

 Presenting their oral arguments to the court Japan argued that:

Another aspect of the case pertains to confining the geographic coverage of Japan’s special permit whaling in the area of Australia’s self-proclaimed Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the Antarctic Ocean. As amply demonstrated by numerous actions, Australia attempts to exercise its jurisdiction in this area. Japan does not recognize the Australian position on the EEZ in relation to the Antarctic. By limiting the geographic coverage of the case to its claimed area in the Antarctic Ocean and adjacent areas, is Australia attempting to give legitimacy to its self-proclaimed position on the EEZ? Or is Australia trying to avoid putting its Antarctic claim to the test, as it would if it imposed a ban on whaling within its claimed Antarctic EEZ, which it has not done.’

Distraction tactics by Japan. No doubt there will be many more as the weeks roll on. The issue at stake here is not whether Australia’s claim to Antarctic territorial waters is justified, but whether the Japanese Government killing whales for purported scientific research is defensible within the modern era.

The Japanese Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Tsuruoka, argued that ‘the case concerns the legality of Japan’s activities under international law and not ethical values or the evaluation of good or bad science.’ This is fundamentally where the viewpoints diverge. Australia argued very strongly last week that what Japan is doing in the Southern Ocean does not equate to good – or even defensible – scientific research, particularly since there are now non-lethal research methods that can provide the information required for managing whale populations. Japan will no doubt argue that the letter of the law (the provisions within the treaty) allows them to essentially do what they like (which they have). The question then is one of whether law can and should be informed by contemporary scientific practice and emerging customary norms.

Is it really plausible to take the ethical aspects of this case out of the equation?

Tsuruoka also said: ‘We agree that animal protection, including the prohibition of unnecessary killing and the preservation of biodiversity, is an essentially good cause’. Lip service to a ‘good cause’, yet the data collected from the hundred’s of whales killed in the Antarctic does not constitute good science and meanwhile stockpiles of whale meat continue to grow in Japan. If this doesn’t constitute unnecessary killing, what would?