Pirates of Greed Get Away with Murder: Appeals Court Favors Japanese Whale Poachers

[Omaha Steve]

http://ecowatch.org/2013/court-favors-whale-poachers/


02-28-2013

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society


The Nisshin Maru pulls a recently killed whale up their slipway.
Photo: Australian Customs

In response to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in a preliminary injunction hearing against Sea Shepherd Conservation Society U.S. as brought by Japan’s Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR)—a government-subsidized front for commercial whaling—the global marine conservation nonprofit calls the ruling a “bad decision,” but says the gavel hasn’t come down quite yet. A ruling from a pending trial and other legal actions are yet to come. Meanwhile, the group says Japan’s whale-poaching pirates of greed are literally getting away with murder—the murder of whales.

Moreover, Sea Shepherd has called for the case to be reviewed again before an eleven-judge Ninth Circuit Court panel. The Ninth Circuit Court issued a temporary injunction in December in favor of the Japanese whale-poaching fleet and against Sea Shepherd U.S.’s activities in the Southern Ocean, overturning a decision by the Honorable District Court Judge Richard A. Jones in March of last year. At the time, the temporary injunction was issued with no opinion whatsoever. The opinion was finally issued late Monday and ignored the well-reasoned ruling in Sea Shepherd’s favor by Judge Jones.

In this most recent ruling, the Ninth Circuit called Sea Shepherd “pirates,” but it is indeed the whale poachers who are the real pirates in this scenario—pirates of greed and murder. At a press conference at the National Press Club earlier this month, iconic environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., president of Waterkeeper Alliance, echoed that sentiment about the ICR:

“ … The Institute for Cetacean Research, which is an arm of the Japanese government, is really a pirate organization masquerading as a scientific research group. … If you are violating international law on the high seas, you are a pirate.

“And we have in our country a long and proud history of battling piracy on the high seas, beginning in 1805 when Thomas Jefferson sent the marines to Tripoli to subdue the Barbary Pirates. And we ought to be, not trying to impede Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd, but we should be issuing him letters of marque in order to support and recognize the important value of his activities to our country and to the world community in battling a pirate organization that is in violation of international laws. He is performing a profound public service for all of us and instead of recognizing him, the U.S. government, various agencies of the U.S. government, have attempted to impede him.”

FULL story at link.

[Submariner]

1. If a submarine is going to surface under a Japanese ship and sink it

that is one of the ships to aim for. Too bad our boats don't regularly cruise the Antarctic.

[cpwm17]

2. That will be on my first day's agenda when I become a US dictator

just after I send all of the US war and financial criminals to jail to stand trial. I need to send in my resume for the job.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Some Related Threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/112737454
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014409354
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022433686

The author of the cited article seems to be unaware that Letters of Marque/Privateers were outlawed internationally in the 1800s IIRC.

I suggest people read the decisions before they go off. Its based on black letter law. Little doubt the 9th Circuit will uphold it en banc, assuming they agree to take it.

Some are spouting off about the uselessness/inapplicability of US court decisions. That is an ignorant thing to say. What they do not realize it forms the basis for additional civil litigation. If the ruling is upheld, Japan will use it to gnaw away at SSCS assets in US courts. Ships could be impounded and contributions seized. There are treaties that support enforcement of judgements world wide. Watson should be as concerned about this as he was about that reused prop fouler a few seasons back. It could beach him for good.