Tuesday 1 April 2014

How Japanese media see the International Court of Justice ruling on Antarctic whaling



THE HAGUE--The International Court of Justice on March 31 ordered a temporary halt to Japan's Antarctic whaling program, ruling that it is not for scientific purposes as the Japanese government had claimed.
Australia had sued Japan at the U.N.'s highest court for resolving disputes between nations in hopes of ending whaling in the icy Southern Ocean.
Reading a 12-4 decision by the court's 16-judge panel, Presiding Judge Peter Tomka said Japan's program fails to justify the large number of minke whales it says it needs to catch under its current Antarctic program--850 annually--and it doesn't catch that many anyway. It also didn't come close to catching the 50 fin and 50 humpback whales it aimed to take.
All that drew into doubt Japan's assertion that its whaling is for scientific purposes, he said.
"The court concludes that the special permits granted by Japan for the killing, taking, and treating of whales ... are not 'for purposes of scientific research'," Tomka said.
The court ordered Japan to halt any issuing of whaling permits at least until the program has been thoroughly revamped.
Japanese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman Noriyuki Shikata told reporters that the country "regrets and is deeply disappointed" by the decision.
But "as a state that respects the rule of law ... and as a responsible member of the global community, Japan will abide by the ruling of the court," he said.
Former Australian environment minister Peter Garrett, who helped launch the suit four years ago, said he felt vindicated by the decision.
"I'm absolutely over the moon, for all those people who wanted to see the charade of scientific whaling cease once and for all," Garrett told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio. "I think (this) means without any shadow of a doubt that we won't see the taking of whales in the Southern Ocean in the name of science."
Although the decision is a major victory for Australia and environmental groups that oppose whaling on ethical grounds, it will not mean the end of whaling.
Japan has a second, smaller scientific program in the northern Pacific--which now may also be subject to challenge…
The ruling did say explicitly that killing whales for scientific purposes would be legal under international law in the context of a better-designed study.
Japan's program was supposed to determine whether commercial whaling of some species can resume without bringing them in danger of extinction.
The ruling noted among other factors that Japan had not considered a smaller program or non-lethal methods to study whale populations, and said Japan had cited only two peer-reviewed scientific papers relating to its program from 2005 to the present--a period during which it has harpooned 3,600 minke whales, a handful of fin whales, and no humpback whales at all.
The Japan Times 31 March 2014:

THE HAGUE – The U.N.’s top court on Monday ordered Japan to end its annual Antarctic whale hunt, saying in a landmark ruling that the program was a commercial activity disguised as science.
“Japan shall revoke any existant authorization, permit or license granted in relation to JARPA II (research program) and refrain from granting any further permits in pursuance to the program,” International Court of Justice Presiding Judge Peter Tomka said…

Japan Today 31 March 2014:

THE HAGUE, Netherlands —
The International Court of Justice on Monday ordered a temporary halt to Japan’s Antarctic whaling program, ruling that it is not for scientific purposes as the Japanese government had claimed.
Australia had sued Japan at the U.N.‘s highest court for resolving disputes between nations in hopes of ending whaling in the icy Southern Ocean.
Reading a 12-4 decision by the court’s 16-judge panel, Presiding Judge Peter Tomka said Japan’s program fails to justify the large number of minke whales it says it needs to catch under its current Antarctic program - 850 annually - and it doesn’t catch that many anyway. It also didn’t come close to catching the 50 fin and 50 humpback whales it aimed to take….

Nikkei Asian Review 31 March 2014:

THE HAGUE (Kyodo) -- Japan on Monday lost a court case lodged by Australia seeking to end Japanese whaling in the Antarctic Ocean, as the U.N. court ruled Japan's whale hunting is not conducted for scientific purposes and forbidding the whaling to continue.
The judgment by the International Court of Justice in The Hague is binding and final without appeal, forcing Japan to change a whaling program it claimed to be for "scientific research."
Japan has made it clear that it will comply with the judgment.
Japan has insisted that its whaling program is consistent with Article 8 of the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which permits research whaling, and that selling whale meat is also permitted by the article as it requires any whales taken to be processed as far as practicable.
But a 16-judge panel at the court decided that Japan's whaling is not consistent with the international agreement, supporting Australia's position that Japan's whaling in the Antarctic Ocean should stop.
After a moratorium on commercial whaling by the International Whaling Commission came into force in 1986, Japan continued whale hunting under quotas set by the Japanese government, saying collecting scientific data was necessary for sustainable use of whale resources.
Japan wanted to resume commercial whaling suspended by the moratorium, and by conducting "scientific whaling" it has sought to provide evidence to end the moratorium….

Mainichi 1 April 2014:

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) -- The International Court of Justice on Monday ordered a temporary halt to Japan's Antarctic whaling program, ruling that it is not for scientific purposes as the Japanese had claimed.
Australia had sued Japan at the U.N.'s highest court for resolving disputes between nations in hopes of ending whaling in the icy Southern Ocean.
Reading a 12-4 decision by the court's 16-judge panel, Presiding Judge Peter Tomka of Slovakia said Japan's program failed to justify the large number of minke whales it takes under its current Antarctic program, while failing to meet much smaller targets for fin and humpback whales.
"The evidence does not establish that the program's design and implementation are reasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives," he said.
He noted among other factors that Japan had not considered a smaller program or non-lethal methods to study whale populations, and that it cited only two peer-reviewed scientific papers relating to its program from 2005 to the present - a period in which it has harpooned 3,600 minke whales, a handful of fin whales, and no humpback whales.
The court ordered Japan to halt any issuing of whaling permits until the program has been revamped….

APRIL 2014: Metgasco Limited versus The People of the Northern Rivers


Coal seam gas exploration, mining and wannabe production company Metgasco Limited may be setting up a temporary village - at 1480 Bentley Road, Bentley where the absentee landlords R.J, P.J & S.A Graham of 16 Koonorigan Road, Goolmangar NSW, have given permission for drilling to occur on their land - and this village has permission for removable accommodation, sanitary, ablutions and dining facilities as well as being potentially kitted out with a liquor bar. However, the good people of the Northern Rivers (with a few simple amenities allowed by local government) have massed to fight against the establishment of unconventional gas fields in the region.

The protesters camp courtesy of @1EarthMedia:

On 31 March 2014 Cowra Community News reported:

More than 2000 people have joined residents in the Northern Rivers region this morning (Monday) to oppose drilling by gas miner Metgasco, says anti-coal seam gas (CSG) alliance Lock the Gate.
The company is undertaking an exploration well at Bentley, west of Lismore, that will target tight sands gas, the group says.
Tight sands gas uses unconventional extraction methods like those used to extract CSG, and involves large numbers of wells, extensive infrastructure, and “risky fracking processes”.
“We are here at this blockade to try to protect the valuable farmland and quiet rural lifestyle that we value so much from invasive gasfields,” Bentley resident Liz Stops says in a statement.
“In a survey undertaken in our local area, 84.5 per cent of 266 residents said that they do not want to live in a gasfield.
“The property owner where the drilling is scheduled to occur does not even live here.
“It is the rest of us whose home it is who will have to live with the consequences of this industry,” says Ms Stops....

Bentley protesters from @LockTheGate:



Not good enough, Premier O'Farrell and Police Commissioner Scipione


A Freedom of Information application by Richard McDonald dated 20 January 2014 has revealed that NSW Police officers had six hundred and fifteen individual criminal convictions ranging from assault causing actual bodily harm, malicious injury, drug possession, motor vehicle theft, fraud, culpable driving, high range PCA drink driving, speeding, domestic violence and much more recorded against their names - either before joining, during training or once they were deployed as serving officers.

A shocking statistic, which ABC News calculates as 1 in every 40 NSW police officers having criminal records.

When laughter became a sin in the Australian House of Representatives


House of Representatives Hansard 26 March 2014:

The SPEAKER: We seem to have a new tactic of having an outburst of infectious laughter—which I suspect may become disorderly—and I suspect it might begin with the member for Franklin. The member for Franklin is warned.
Mr Burke: I rise on a point of order, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: It had better be a proper point of order.
Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, are you ruling people out of order because they are laughing?
The SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. The member for Franklin will leave the chamber under standing order 94(a).
The member for Franklin then left the chamber