Aussies Kiwis bring yourself up 2 date about Japanese whaling issues

PLEASE SEE MY OTHER INDYMEDIA POSTS

1. Legal case ruling in the southern ocean;
2. Ramming the Ady Gil real reasons for weak Aust. govt. response
3. Kevin Rudd's e-mail address

IMPORTANT POINT - There are Japanese citizens opposed to whaling. Some have been arrested.

JAPANESE NAVY INFO & USA 11TH FLEET – JOINT EXERCISES - Japanese no war constitution unless defending Japan
BRENNAN WROTE - The question is whether the close cooperation between USA and Japan will mean US reluctance to pressure the Japanese Government to stop funding whaling? See whether USA President Barack Obama and new Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama are just paying lip service to their comments about whaling or whether they will get it done. YES WE CAN!
It is also unlikely that JAPAN would violate its constitution by adopting the view that because Australia naval vessels escorted Japanese whaling ships out of the southern Ocean sanctuary it was an attack on Japan as some if not all of the ships are flying Japanese flags and registered in Japan. It is also unlikely the US 11th fleet would allow the Japanese to sail against Australia over such an action as the US has a military treaty with Australia.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZUS for treaty details

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.83/pub_detail.asp
JAPAN’S balanced naval force of about 45 destroyers, 9 frigates and 16-17 submarines are divided into four Escort Flotilla’s designed to protect shipping lanes in concert with shore-based ASW and strike aircraft
CHINA - The PLAN was long dominated by doctrines and forces that stressed coastal defenses. But today its fleet of about 70 submarines, 25 destroyers and 44 frigates, divided into North Sea, East Sea and South Sea Fleets
USA SEVENTH FLEET, LOCATION YOKOSUKA, JAPAN - established 19 February 1943 from Southwest Pacific Force, is the largest of the forward-deployed U.S. fleets, with 50-60 ships, 350 aircraft and 60,000 Navy and Marine Corps personnel.

JAPENESE DEFENSE CONSTITUTION ASPECTS BEING ERODED
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Bomb by bomb, Japan sheds military restraints
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/world/asia/23iht-23japan.6776834.html
By Norimitsu Onishi
ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, Guam — To take part in its annual exercises with the United States Air Force here last month, Japan practiced dropping 500-pound live bombs on Farallon de Medinilla, a tiny island in the western Pacific's turquoise waters more than 150 miles north of here.
In a little over half a decade, Japan's military has carried out changes considered unthinkable a few years back. In the Indian Ocean, Japanese destroyers and refueling ships are helping American and other militaries fight in Afghanistan. In Iraq, Japanese planes are transporting cargo and American troops to Baghdad from Kuwait.
Japan is acquiring weapons that blur the lines between defensive and offensive. For the Guam bombing run, Japan deployed its newest fighter jets, the F-2's, the first developed jointly by Japan and the United States, on their maiden trip here. Unlike its older jets, the F-2's were able to fly the 1,700 miles from northern Japan to Guam without refueling

INFO ABOUT THE JAPANESE CONSTITUTION REGARDING GOING TO WAR
BRENNAN WROTE – well it seems that the Japanese whaling fleet has Japanese flagged ships and perhaps other countries flags. See the Panama case info further on herein.
http://www.mod.go.jp/e/d_policy/dp01.html

Constitution of Japan and right of SELF- defense w.mod.go.jpight of Self-Defense
THE CONSTITUTION OF JAPAN
(THE PREAMBLE)
We, the Japanese people, acting through our duly elected representatives in the National Diet, determined that we shall secure for ourselves and our posterity the fruits of peaceful cooperation with all nations and the blessings of liberty throughout this land, and resolved that never again shall we be visited with the horrors of war through the action of government, do proclaim that sovereign power resides with the people and do firmly establish this Constitution
B. Requisites for Exercise of Right of Self-Defense.
The use of armed force for the exercise of the right of self-defense under Article 9 of the Constitution is confined to corresponding to the following three requisites:
(i) there is an imminent and illegitimate act of aggression against Japan;
(ii) there is no appropriate means to repel this aggression other than the use of the right of self-defense; and
(iii) the use of armed strength is confined to the minimum level necessary for repelling.

C. Geographical Scope of Exercise of Right of Self-Defense.
The geographical scope of use of the minimum force necessary to defend Japan as the use of self-defense right is not necessarily confined to the Japanese territorial land, sea and airspace. Generally speaking, however, there is no specific definition of how far this geographic area stretches, since it would vary with each individual situation.
It is, however, not permissible constitutionally to dispatch armed troops to foreign territorial land, sea and airspace for the purpose of using military power, as a so-called overseas deployment of troops, since it generally exceeds the minimum level necessary for self-defense.

REGISTRATION OF THE COLLISION SHIP

Ship Name: Shonan Maru 2 (Japan) US NODC Code: 499C Okinawa Prefecture

Contact: Mr. Marikatsu Nishihira
Operator: Okinawa Prefecture
26-1-3 Yamari
Naha Okinawa 900 Japan

LEGAL RESOLUTION AVENUES
Brennan wrote – Perhaps the Japanese will finally abandon the idea of whaling and renewing commercial whaling once they register on civilized human beings reaction to this brutality. It created a very bad image for Japanese generally YET you can see Japanese anti whaling protesters have been arrested for trying to stop whaling. Net: There is Japanese citizen opposition within JAPAN as well. MOST WOULD NOT KNOW THIS.

http://www.icj-cij.org/ - International Court of Justice
Under international law, every ship must sail under the flag of a sovereign state. Flags of convenience, like offshore companies, offer owners the chance to register in countries offering tax regimes that are lax or non-existent. Labour can be procured from anywhere in the world, and there are few regulatory requirements, making it almost impossible for receiving ports to find out who owns the ship or to control conditions on board.
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm - UNITED NATIONS - Oceans and law of the seas
http://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html - International tribunal for the law of the sea

SHIP FLAGS of CONVENIENCE
http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/flagsofconvenience.pdf
October 28, 2008
Amsterdam: The Oriental Bluebird, re-supply and transport ship of Japan's whaling fleet, has been de-flagged and fined, following a legal ruling by Panamanian authorities. Greenpeace is calling on Japan's government to uphold international law by mothballing the vessel and ending the annual hunt in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

A ship is said to be flying a flag of convenience if it is registered in a foreign country "for purposes of reducing operating costs or avoiding government regulations"
Today, more than half of the world’s merchant ships (measured by tonnage) are registered under so-called flags of convenience, formally referred to as "open registries".[3]
Traditional reasons for choosing an open register include protection from income taxes and avoidance of wage scales and regulations. A specific example of the type of advantage flying a flag of convenience offers is bypassing the 50% duty the United States government charges on repairs performed on American-flagged ships in foreign ports

In international waters, are you beyond the reach of the law?
Brennan wrote – Go to this site and you will get the law of the seas and maritime law overview.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2250/in-international-waters-ar...
May 23, 2006
Dear Straight Dope:
I have heard that in international waters you can commit endless crimes with no jurisdiction to prosecute you. Is this true? Do such ungoverned spaces exist? I am in no way interested in going to them, but I know they exist and my friends say they don't. Please help settle this argument.
— Michelle
Freedom of the seas is a fundamental principle of the law, but it only applies to countries. At sea ordinary folks remain subject to at least one nation's jurisdiction--sometimes more.
Freedom of the seas is often credited to the Dutch jurist Grotius. In the early seventeenth century the Dutch wanted part of the East Indies trade. Several nations, especially Spain and Portugal, claimed control over all the oceans, which prevented the Dutch from reaching foreign ports. The idea that a country could claim control of the sea was called mare clausum (closed sea). Grotius, a pioneer in international law, argued for the right of innocent passage (or navigation) on the high seas. He noted, "the sea is called indifferently the property of no one (res nullius), or a common possession (res communis), or public property (res publica)." Grotius contended that the sea could not be owned, and that no country could deny another country's ships innocent passage right up to the shoreline.
Grotius didn't dream up freedom of the seas on his own. He relied on Roman law and the maritime customs of Asian and African countries dating back to "before history was ever recorded," according to Ram Anand, in his essay, "Freedom of the Seas: Past, Present and Future." Spanish theologians of the sixteenth century had argued for freedom of the seas as well.
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) lays out the current rules. As of April 2006, 149 nations had ratified the LOSC. The U.S. played a major role in the drafting of the LOSC, but then decided not to sign it. Never fear: the rules we're discussing here apply to the U.S. The U.S. is party to other treaties with similar provisions, has asserted rights available only under the LOSC, and has said that its provisions are part of existing international law. So it's the best place to start looking for answers.
You asked about ungoverned spaces. Technically they exist--the LOSC calls them the high seas: "No State may validly purport to subject any part of the high seas to its sovereignty." But that doesn't mean you can avoid prosecution for crimes committed there.
The idea that there is no jurisdiction on the high seas comes from confusion about the meaning of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction describes the limits of the legal power of a nation (international lawyers call them States) to make (prescriptive jurisdiction), apply (adjudicative jurisdiction), and enforce (enforcement jurisdiction) rules of conduct. One basis of jurisdiction is territory--a State can make and enforce laws in its own territory. The confusion arises from the assumption that this is the only basis of jurisdiction. It isn't.
THERE ARE FIVE:
(1) The territorial principle, which we've already covered.
(2) The nationality principle
(3) The passive personality principle
(4) The protective principle. According to Amnesty International:
(5) Universal jurisdiction

Territory still plays a big part in the law of the sea. States' territorial claims have expanded considerably since the 18th century. Two hundred miles offshore (when I say mile, I mean the nautical mile, which is 6076 feet, or 1.150779 statute miles) is the limit of a State's potential exclusive economic zone. I say potential because States must claim the territory they want within this limit, and not all of them do so. In this zone the State has some exclusive rights to exploration and resources. However, other States' ships have a right of innocent passage through the EEZ, just as Grotius argued.

Japanese Whaling Ship Outlawed Following Greenpeace Action in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary
http://www.losangeleschronicle.com/articles/view/79198

Brennan wrote – you can see the relevance of flagging in countries such as Liberia etc. tHEY ONLY GOT FINED $10,000 USD

International Desk
October 28, 2008
Amsterdam: The Oriental Bluebird, re-supply and transport ship of Japan's whaling fleet, has been de-flagged and fined, following a legal ruling by Panamanian authorities. Greenpeace is calling on Japan's government to uphold international law by mothballing the vessel and ending the annual hunt in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

PRESIDENTS COMMENTS from- USA BARACK OBAMA & new Japanese Prime Minister YUKIO HATOYAMA
FINAL VOYAGE OF THE JAPANESE WHALING FLEET?
http://yubanet.com/enviro/Final-voyage-of-the-Japanese-whaling-fleet.php

Brennan wrote – Obama (in my opinion) best US president ever and may help get this disgusting practice stopped. Let’s hope there is not too many trade and military co-operation issues that will screw the wishes of the citizen majority in the countries where the atrocities are taking place namely Australia and New Zealand.
Many Thanks to American celebrity finance or LESS would be happening

Published on Nov 19, 2009 - 8:06:46 AM
By: Greenpeace
INNOSHIMA, Japan, Nov. 19, 2009 - Following a week of potentially crippling budgetary reviews and a high-profile visit from US President Barack Obama to Japan, shortly after 10am today the so-called 'scientific' whaling fleet crept out of port, as Greenpeace called for today's departure to be the programme's last.

Earlier, the environmental group unveiled a ‘Yes We Can' banner in front of the factory ship Nisshin Maru, calling on new Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and the visiting US President Barack Obama to work together to end whaling.

In their election campaigns, both leaders signalled that there is no future in whaling. The Obama administration is publicly opposed to ‘scientific' whaling, while Hatoyama promised to wipe out bureaucratic corruption and the waste of taxpayer money, of which the whaling industry is a prime example.

This year the fleet's Antarctic hunt will be subsidised by 795 million yen ($8.8 million US dollars) of taxpayer money. However, the programme already operates at a loss due to lack of demand for whale meat - the wholesale price of whale meat has just been lowered for the second time this year in an effort to stimulate the low demand - and programme costs are set to increase. (1, 2)

"Japanese taxpayers' money is being squandered on life-support for a whaling programme that produces virtually nothing of value," said Jun Hoshikawa, Executive Director of Greenpeace Japan. "The government should switch off the industry's respirator."

Elimination of subsidies to the programme could also prove to be vindication for Greenpeace activists Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki, who were arrested in 2008 and put on trial for intercepting a box of whale meat and exposing an embezzlement ring within the whaling programme. While the resulting scandal made international headlines, the official investigation was suspiciously dropped, and Sato and Suzuki were arrested and put on trial. (3)

"With well over 9,000 minke whales killed in 22 years and no useful data produced, Japan's so-called ‘research' in the Antarctic is an international embarrassment," concluded Hoshikawa.
FACTORY SHIP – OWNERSHIP and FUNDING
The 22-year-old, 8,000-ton vessel Nisshin Maru (日新丸?) is the largest ship of the Japanese whaling fleet. The ship is part of a six to seven ship fleet headed by research leader Shigetoshi Nishiwaki and is based in Japan in Shimonoseki harbor.[3] It is a converted stern trawler and is the world's only whale factory ship. [4] The ship is owned by Tokyo-based company Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha, which is subsidiary of the government-funded Institute of Cetacean Research