The Consequences of the ICJ Decision in the Whaling Case for Antarctica and the Antarctic Treaty System

Abstract

This paper identifies parts of the International Court of Justice’s judgment in Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) that might hold broader relevance beyond the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, and explores what that might entail for the Antarctic Treaty System. There are four aspects explored. First, an analysis of the Court’s treatment of Japan’s challenge to jurisdiction that touched upon the relevance or otherwise of Antarctic sovereignty to the issues at hand in the case. Second, the Court’s drawing of important conclusions from the Whaling Convention’s status as an ‘evolving instrument’, in light of it having a treaty body with ongoing decision making responsibility will be discussed. Third, to what extent might the Court’s assessment of the concept of ‘science’ in a legal context find relevance in Antarctic obligations will be analysed. Finally, the success of the claim brought by Australia, and the manner in which the Court addressed the issues before it, and whether they bear any consequences for potential, future environmental cases, will be discussed.