Sea Shepherd condemned by International Whaling Commission.
- Thread starter Kim
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
- Status
Well..it's not illegal.
Well actually I am not. Since people seem to like wikipedia here I am going to quote their article regarding whaling which I back-sourced with another website that will be listed below:
The change in the IWC's institutional mission began in the early 1970s, and is often linked with the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment at Stockholm in 1972. The result of this shift is most evident in the IWC's adoption of a five-year moratorium on commercial whaling, which commenced in 1986 and has been extended to the present, and in the IWC's recent designation of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
A moratorium, this is taken from Merriam Webster online is described as:
1.a suspension of activity: a moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons. 2.a legally authorized period to delay payment of money due or the performance of some other legal obligation, as in an emergency. 3.an authorized period of delay or waiting.
Now is Japan or is Japan not violating that very legal act by still sending out commercial (for profit) whaling vessels? Here is some more information on international whaling acts and laws:
American Society of International Law Wildlife Interest Group Resources
Whaling and international law
Here is perhaps the most alarming writing of all:
Japan's whaling program 'breaks international law'. 08/11/2005. ABC News Online
Which I will quote:
An animal welfare organisation says it has legal advice that Japan's expanded whaling program in the Antarctic breaks international law.
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) says Japan is about to start a program that could kill up to 940 whales - more than double the number killed last year in the name of research.
The IFAW says it has legal advice that Japan's program breaches international law.
Campaigner Darren Kindleysides says the Australian Government has challenged Japan through the International Whaling Commission (IWC) but diplomacy has failed.
Mr Kindleysides wants Australia to take action in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to stop the program.
"Japan's whaling program is an abuse of rights under the International Whaling Convention," he said.
"It appears that this so-called scientific research is nothing more really than commercial whaling in disguise.
"We're calling on the Australian Government really to take the Government of Japan to the international tribunal and to seek immediately provisional measures under the tribunal to halt Japanese scientific whaling really before it can get under way."
An international law expert also says Australia has a strong case to stop Japan's scientific whaling program under international law.
Professor Donald Rothwell, from Sydney University, argues Japan's plans to double its whale take are an abuse of its legal right.
"The number of whales that Japan purports to take is not commensurate with the number of whales that would be necessary to engage in scientific research," he said.
"There's also increasing evidence that non-lethal means can be used to take data from whales to obtain information about whaling stocks."
Here is a link to an article from ABC entitled:
Court rules Japan whalers breaking Aust law
Court rules Japan whalers breaking Aust law - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Here is a quote from that article:
The Federal Court has ruled that the Japanese whaling fleet is breaking Australian law, and has issued an injunction to stop its activities.
The court says it is satisfied that the Japanese whaling fleet, controlled by Japanese company Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha, has contravened numerous sections of the Environment Protection Act by killing and injuring Antarctic minke and fin whales in the Australian whale sanctuary.
It has ordered that it be restrained from continuing whaling.
These Japanese whalers they really are lovely human beings. I sure hate the thought of one of them getting hit with a stinkbomb. Look at the picture of the whaling vessel in the article. It actually has a banner reading "Greenpeace misleads you." If I were a sea sherpard vessel my banner would read "Greenpeace misleads you and we will sink you!"
The change in the IWC's institutional mission began in the early 1970s, and is often linked with the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment at Stockholm in 1972. The result of this shift is most evident in the IWC's adoption of a five-year moratorium on commercial whaling, which commenced in 1986 and has been extended to the present, and in the IWC's recent designation of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
A moratorium, this is taken from Merriam Webster online is described as:
1.a suspension of activity: a moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons. 2.a legally authorized period to delay payment of money due or the performance of some other legal obligation, as in an emergency. 3.an authorized period of delay or waiting.
Now is Japan or is Japan not violating that very legal act by still sending out commercial (for profit) whaling vessels? Here is some more information on international whaling acts and laws:
American Society of International Law Wildlife Interest Group Resources
Whaling and international law
Here is perhaps the most alarming writing of all:
Japan's whaling program 'breaks international law'. 08/11/2005. ABC News Online
Which I will quote:
An animal welfare organisation says it has legal advice that Japan's expanded whaling program in the Antarctic breaks international law.
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) says Japan is about to start a program that could kill up to 940 whales - more than double the number killed last year in the name of research.
The IFAW says it has legal advice that Japan's program breaches international law.
Campaigner Darren Kindleysides says the Australian Government has challenged Japan through the International Whaling Commission (IWC) but diplomacy has failed.
Mr Kindleysides wants Australia to take action in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to stop the program.
"Japan's whaling program is an abuse of rights under the International Whaling Convention," he said.
"It appears that this so-called scientific research is nothing more really than commercial whaling in disguise.
"We're calling on the Australian Government really to take the Government of Japan to the international tribunal and to seek immediately provisional measures under the tribunal to halt Japanese scientific whaling really before it can get under way."
An international law expert also says Australia has a strong case to stop Japan's scientific whaling program under international law.
Professor Donald Rothwell, from Sydney University, argues Japan's plans to double its whale take are an abuse of its legal right.
"The number of whales that Japan purports to take is not commensurate with the number of whales that would be necessary to engage in scientific research," he said.
"There's also increasing evidence that non-lethal means can be used to take data from whales to obtain information about whaling stocks."
Here is a link to an article from ABC entitled:
Court rules Japan whalers breaking Aust law
Court rules Japan whalers breaking Aust law - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Here is a quote from that article:
The Federal Court has ruled that the Japanese whaling fleet is breaking Australian law, and has issued an injunction to stop its activities.
The court says it is satisfied that the Japanese whaling fleet, controlled by Japanese company Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha, has contravened numerous sections of the Environment Protection Act by killing and injuring Antarctic minke and fin whales in the Australian whale sanctuary.
It has ordered that it be restrained from continuing whaling.
These Japanese whalers they really are lovely human beings. I sure hate the thought of one of them getting hit with a stinkbomb. Look at the picture of the whaling vessel in the article. It actually has a banner reading "Greenpeace misleads you." If I were a sea sherpard vessel my banner would read "Greenpeace misleads you and we will sink you!"
cdreamer
Contributor
Just read a book called "The Whale Warriors" written by Peter Heller. He documents a Sea Shepherd campaign from 2 years ago. It was a great book that gives a lot of insight into the hearts and minds of Capt. Watson and his crew. I highly recommend this book to anyone.
In the book Capt. Watson summarizes specifically how Japan is violating international conservation law.
He states:
1. The Japanese are whaling in violation of the International Whaling Commissions global moratorium on commercial whaling. The IWC scientific committee does not recognize this bogus
research that the Japanese are using as an excuse.
2. The Japanese are killing whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Santuary.
3. The Japanese are killing whales unlawfully in the Australian Antarctic Territory.
4. The Japanese are targeting fin whales and humpback whales. These are endangered species and thus this is a violation of CITES, the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna.
5. The Japanese are in violation of IWC regulation 19(a). The IWC regulations in the Schedule to the Convention forbid the use of factory ships to process any protected stock: 19(a) It is forbidden to use a factory ship or a land station for the purpose of treating any whales which are
classified are Protection Stocks in paragraph 10. Paragraph 10(c) provides a definition of Protection Stocks and states that Protection Stocks are listed in the Tables of the Schedule. Table 1 lists all the baleen whales, including minke, fin and humpback whales and states that all of them are Protection Stocks.
6. In addition the IWC regulations specifically ban the use of factory ships to process any whales except minke whales: Paragraph 10(d) provides: (d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10 there shall be a moratorium on the taking, killing, or treating of whales, except minke whales, by factory ships or whale catchers attached to factory ships. This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, except minke whales.
It is not illegal to interfere on the high seas against their illegal whaling activities. In fact we are
legally authorized to do so in accordance with the UN World Charter for Nature.
The United Nations World Charter for Nature states in Section 21:
States and, to the extent they are able, other public authorities, international organizations, individuals, groups, and corportations shall:
(c) implement the applicable international legal provisions for the conservation of nature, and the
protection of the environment.
(d) ensure that activities within their jurisdiction, or control do not cause damage to the natural systems located within other states or in the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
(e) safeguard and conserve nature in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
and finally section 24 states:
Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter: acting individually, in association with others or through participation in the polictical process, each person shall strive to ensure that the objectives and requirements of the present charter are met.
In the book Capt. Watson summarizes specifically how Japan is violating international conservation law.
He states:
1. The Japanese are whaling in violation of the International Whaling Commissions global moratorium on commercial whaling. The IWC scientific committee does not recognize this bogus
research that the Japanese are using as an excuse.
2. The Japanese are killing whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Santuary.
3. The Japanese are killing whales unlawfully in the Australian Antarctic Territory.
4. The Japanese are targeting fin whales and humpback whales. These are endangered species and thus this is a violation of CITES, the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna.
5. The Japanese are in violation of IWC regulation 19(a). The IWC regulations in the Schedule to the Convention forbid the use of factory ships to process any protected stock: 19(a) It is forbidden to use a factory ship or a land station for the purpose of treating any whales which are
classified are Protection Stocks in paragraph 10. Paragraph 10(c) provides a definition of Protection Stocks and states that Protection Stocks are listed in the Tables of the Schedule. Table 1 lists all the baleen whales, including minke, fin and humpback whales and states that all of them are Protection Stocks.
6. In addition the IWC regulations specifically ban the use of factory ships to process any whales except minke whales: Paragraph 10(d) provides: (d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10 there shall be a moratorium on the taking, killing, or treating of whales, except minke whales, by factory ships or whale catchers attached to factory ships. This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, except minke whales.
It is not illegal to interfere on the high seas against their illegal whaling activities. In fact we are
legally authorized to do so in accordance with the UN World Charter for Nature.
The United Nations World Charter for Nature states in Section 21:
States and, to the extent they are able, other public authorities, international organizations, individuals, groups, and corportations shall:
(c) implement the applicable international legal provisions for the conservation of nature, and the
protection of the environment.
(d) ensure that activities within their jurisdiction, or control do not cause damage to the natural systems located within other states or in the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
(e) safeguard and conserve nature in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
and finally section 24 states:
Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter: acting individually, in association with others or through participation in the polictical process, each person shall strive to ensure that the objectives and requirements of the present charter are met.
OP
So you can quote an "opinion" from the IFAW... (whoever they are...)
....and an Australian court talking about Australian law - but which has never been tested.
So what's illegal?
The Japanese whale hunt is conducted under Article VIII, paragraph 1 of the Convention
or they could just do what Iceland and Norway do and use the opt-out...
You're not a lawyer, are you?
OP
They do. Permits aren't issued by the committee, national governments issue them. Proposals for such permits are submitted to the committee for approval. The present Japanese activities were submitted, and approved.
If what Japan was doing wasn't sanctioned by the IWC, then why would they have condemned the activities of Sea Shepherd just last week?
ekremer
Contributor
Except from the article I linked earlier, Sea Shepherd DOE NOT have permission from the UN and/or the IWC to do what they are doing. they are VIGILANTIES and PIRATES. Additonally your analogy of slashing tires is wrong, thats like taking out a propeller, not scutteling a ship. You need to step it up and torch the cars making them unsuable ever again and putting a large financial burder on the hunters without a trial. We have courts in our contries for a reason, and circumventing them is illegal and a violation of these peoples civil right.
Wait one second! If what you are saying is right and the courts and laws of this country (now we are way off topic) prevent what you call vigilantes and pirates then can someone explain to me how companies like Blackwater USA used mercenaries to enforce looting laws in New Orleans right after Hurricane Katrina.
If a private for profit company like Blackwater USA can be hired as fill in police why couldn't a private not for profit conservation group be used to enforce conservation law across the globe. Furthermore Blackwater was using machine guns and pistols in New Orleans not stink bombs.
There are instances where our government and governments across the globe have asked private organizations to enforce the law. The book cdreamer quotes, "The Whale Warriors" I have read and it is an excellent book. If people would take the time to read that book they would have a much better understanding of sea shepard and the way whaling laws were formed and are presided over.
As for you Kim you seem to have some sort of connection to whaling considering the way you go after people who are against it and support sea shepard. Why do you think it is alright for the Japanese people to mislead the world and say they are doing, "whale research" when what they are really doing is killing whales in other countries waters to eat. Just read the articles I linked in my previous posts - this is exactly what the Japanese where doing in Australia.
My question to you is this Kim: what should happen to Japanese whaling fleets when they A. lie about what they are doing as they kill whales and B. enter another countries protected waters (marine sanctuaries) and kill whales from there. Do you really feel that these people should have no repercussions to their actions when they do something like that. Why doesn't the country of Japan have the administration behind these whaling operations arrested and the operation closed down Enron style? Considering the fact that Japan has NEVER complied with whaling law and other then what Sea Shepard does to them seems to get by just fine makes me wonder without Sea Shepard what would be done to protect these whales when they are already in protected waters?
If a private for profit company like Blackwater USA can be hired as fill in police why couldn't a private not for profit conservation group be used to enforce conservation law across the globe. Furthermore Blackwater was using machine guns and pistols in New Orleans not stink bombs.
There are instances where our government and governments across the globe have asked private organizations to enforce the law. The book cdreamer quotes, "The Whale Warriors" I have read and it is an excellent book. If people would take the time to read that book they would have a much better understanding of sea shepard and the way whaling laws were formed and are presided over.
As for you Kim you seem to have some sort of connection to whaling considering the way you go after people who are against it and support sea shepard. Why do you think it is alright for the Japanese people to mislead the world and say they are doing, "whale research" when what they are really doing is killing whales in other countries waters to eat. Just read the articles I linked in my previous posts - this is exactly what the Japanese where doing in Australia.
My question to you is this Kim: what should happen to Japanese whaling fleets when they A. lie about what they are doing as they kill whales and B. enter another countries protected waters (marine sanctuaries) and kill whales from there. Do you really feel that these people should have no repercussions to their actions when they do something like that. Why doesn't the country of Japan have the administration behind these whaling operations arrested and the operation closed down Enron style? Considering the fact that Japan has NEVER complied with whaling law and other then what Sea Shepard does to them seems to get by just fine makes me wonder without Sea Shepard what would be done to protect these whales when they are already in protected waters?
ekremer
Contributor
I didn't read anythig that said contract enforcment officers aren't allowed. However they still need to follow the law. They need to A be sanctioned for the body they are doing work with (they are not sanctioned by the UN or the IWC) B. Follow the Law (passing jugement and sentencing people by sinking their ships w/o a trial isn't it. Additionally attacking crew with acid I doubt would be SOP for apprehending a criminal.) and since IANAL I would imagine C. If they choose to be a search and apprehend agency (like a bounty hunter) there needs to be a request from the governing body to go after these specific people (a warrant.)
Can I ask you a question ekremer: "Are you okay with whaling, it doesn't bother you?" "You don't have a problem with the Japanese entering the protected waters of other nations and killing whales (when they kill whales in other countries marine parks that is illegal) where they have no legal right to do so, your cool with that? It doesn't bother you that Japan is lying and telling other countries that they are doing research when what they are really doing is killing whales to eat? I am just curious.
- Status
Similar threads
