The Washington Post

ICJ rules against Japanese whaling

This morning, the International court of Justice issued a long awaited decision in Australia’s case against Japan for illegal whaling under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. Japan lost, 12-4. Japan had claimed that its whaling was part of legitimate “scientific research,” but 12 of the 16 judges on the ICJ did not buy it. Looking at the details of Japan’s whaling program, the court concluded that Japan was actually engaged in impermissible commercial whaling.

As Julian Ku notes at Opinion Juris, it will be interesting to see whether Japan complies with this decision. ICJ judgments are not necessarily binding, and the ICJ lacks any means of enforcing its decisions. In this case, however, Japan chose to participate in the case and said it will accept the judgment. Even if Japan complies, however, this may not mean an end to whaling. Insofar as the judgment was heavily dependent upon the details of how Japan conducts whaling now, it is possible that more carefully controlled could pass muster — and I would not be surprised to see Japan try.

Here are links to the opinions and an early news report.

UPDATE: Duke’s James Salzman comments:

Nearly four years after the initial filings, the International Court of Justice just came down with a decision on Japan’s whaling program in Antarctica (JARPA II). Japan has been making use of the scientific permit exception to continue whaling since the moratorium launched in the 1980s. . . .

The bottom line is that 12 of the 16 justices were not persuaded that Japan’s whaling has been reasonably related to its scientific research objectives.

The decision represents a huge victory for anti-whaling advocates and countries. It leaves open the question, though, of whether Japan will continue with smaller but better-justified whaling programs as well as uncertain political implications for countries such as Norway and Iceland that entered reservations to the moratorium.

Jonathan H. Adler teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at the Case Western University School of Law, where he is the inaugural Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Business Law and Regulation.



Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments

Sign up for email updates from the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

You have signed up for the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

Thank you for signing up
You'll receive e-mail when new stories are published in this series.
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
How to make Sean Brock's 'Heritage' cornbread
New limbs for Pakistani soldiers
The signature dish of Charleston, S.C.
Play Videos
Why seasonal allergies make you miserable
John Lewis, 'Marv the Barb' and the politics of barber shops
What you need to know about filming the police
Play Videos
The Post taste tests Pizza Hut's new hot dog pizza
5 tips for using your thermostat
Michael Bolton's cinematic serenade to Detroit
Play Videos
Full disclosure: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1 ghoul
Pandas, from birth to milk to mom
The signature drink of New Orleans
Next Story
Eugene Volokh · March 31, 2014

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.