Citing research needs, Japan has been able to repeatedly skirt the ban whaling, imposed as far back as 1986 by the International Whaling Commission.
Advertisement
Author Kyung-Jun Song of the University of Ulsan’s Whale Research Institute wrote that “acquisition of this meat is a powerful incentive for fishers”. “It is completely unacceptable for the Japanese government to ignore the International Court of Justice”, said Junichi Sato, executive director of Greenpeace Japan, in a statement.
Malcolm Turnbull is facing a diplomatic balancing act with the prime minister’s first official visit to Japan set to coincide with the resumption of Japanese whaling.
Similarly, Keiko Endo, a 21-year old art student said she had eaten whale as a child, but didn’t come across it very much these days as it was becoming increasingly unpopular among her generation.
The Japanese Fisheries Agency told the IWC in a document of its plans to resume whaling, arguing that the lower number of catches meant the plan was “scientifically reasonable”.
In 2014, Australia appeared to win a significant victory, as the International Court of Justice found that Japan’s “scientific” research failed to meet the standards laid out by the IWC, and the court ordered a halt to the whaling. Moreover, it is no secret that the whale carcass is quickly processed into food, ends up being sold in shops and restaurants, and is even served up in school lunches, reported Yahoo.
“We do not accept in any way, shape, or form the concept of killing whales for so-called “scientific research”, said Hunt, adding “Japan can not unilaterally decide whether it has adequately addressed the Scientific Committee’s [of the International Whaling Commission] questions”.
Last year, the International Whaling Commission rejected a proposal to resume hunting on the grounds that its lethal sampling would not actually help calculate the population size necessary to resume sustainable hunting in the Antarctic, as Japan’s proposal suggested.
The Australian and New Zealand experts said the new mission was inconsistent with Japan’s global obligations. While it was Australia which had brought the case against Japan in ICJ, the country indicated it might send a boat that will follow the Japanese fleet. “Non-lethal research techniques are the most effective and efficient method of studying all cetaceans”.
Advertisement
The court concluded that the special permits granted by Japan for the killing of whales in connection with JARPA II are not “for purposes of scientific research”. Sea Shepherd Australia said Monday it would follow the latest mission, which Japan said would aim to kill a total of 333 minke whales-some two-thirds under previous targets.
