3d4yVkKMl

- 64 -
(iii) Co-operation with other research institutions
220. Australia points to limited co-operation between JARPA II researchers and other
scientists as evidence for its contention that JARPA II is not a programme for purposes of scientific
research. One of the experts called by Australia, Mr. Gales, stated that JARPA II “operates in
complete isolation” from other Japanese and international research projects concerning the
Antarctic ecosystem.
221. In response to a question put by a Member of the Court, Japan cited co-operation with
other Japanese research institutions. The expert called by Japan, Mr. Walløe, suggested that
co-operation with international research programmes “would be difficult for personal and political
reasons”, given that the use of lethal methods is contentious among scientists. He acknowledged
that co-operation with other Japanese research institutions, such as the National Institute for Polar
Research, could be improved.
222. The Court notes that the evidence invoked by Japan to demonstrate co-operation with
Japanese research institutions relates to JARPA, not JARPA II. It observes that some further
evidence of co-operation between JARPA II and other domestic and international research
institutions could have been expected in light of the programme’s focus on the Antarctic ecosystem
and environmental changes in the region.
(d) Conclusion regarding the application of Article VIII, paragraph 1, to JARPA II
223. In light of the standard of review set forth above (see paragraph 67), and having
considered the evidence with regard to the design and implementation of JARPA II and the
arguments of the Parties, it is now for the Court to conclude whether the killing, taking and treating
of whales under the special permits granted in connection with JARPA II is “for purposes of
scientific research” under Article VIII of the Convention.
224. The Court finds that the use of lethal sampling per se is not unreasonable in relation to
the research objectives of JARPA II. However, as compared to JARPA, the scale of lethal
sampling in JARPA II is far more extensive with regard to Antarctic minke whales, and the
programme includes the lethal sampling of two additional whale species. Japan states that this
expansion is required by the new research objectives of JARPA II, in particular, the objectives
relating to ecosystem research and the construction of a model of multi-species competition. In the
view of the Court, however, the target sample sizes in JARPA II are not reasonable in relation to
achieving the programme’s objectives.
225. First, the broad objectives of JARPA and JARPA II overlap considerably. To the extent
that the objectives are different, the evidence does not reveal how those differences lead to the
considerable increase in the scale of lethal sampling in the JARPA II Research Plan. Secondly, the