40 Turning now to the use of lethal

40 Turning now to the use of lethal methods and the scale of the sampling involved under JARPA II, it should be recalled that Article VIII of the Convention authorizes Contracting Governments to grant special permits to their nationals to kill and take whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions and other conditions that the Government “thinks fit”. At the same time, following the adoption of paragraph 30 of the schedule in 1979, the exercise of that right is subject to the review and commentary of the Scientific Committee of the IWC and the respect for the Guidelines issued by the Committee for that purpose, namely Annex P. This annex, which was approved by consensus by all the States Parties to the Convention, requires, as indicated above, “an assessment of why non-lethal methods, methods associated with any ongoing commercial whaling, or analyses of past data have been considered to be insufficient”. Thus, the use of lethal methods for purposes of scientific research or the insufficient consideration of non-lethal methods in scientific research programmes has to be assessed and justified, and is subject to review and comment by the Scientific Committee of the IWC.
41. Did Japan comply with these conditions and did it give adequate consideration to the use of non-lethal methods in JARPA II? Are such non-lethal methods used in JARPA II? The evidence submitted to the Court shows that the JARPA II plan clearly mentions the non-lethal methodologies which are to be employed in the programme, including “sighting” surveys, “ecosystem surveys” of the habitat environment of whales, “oceanographic and meteorological observations . . ., including sea ice, surface temperature, sea surface height and chlorophyll α concentration over the entire research area, using satellite data”23.
42. Moreover, at the oral hearings, Counsel for Japan affirmed that “Japan has put much effort into non-lethal research methods” and that JARPA II “scientists have . . . had some success with biopsy sampling and satellite tagging of large, slow-moving whale species such as the humpback”24. As evidence, he referred to the Cruise Report of the JARPA II scientists for the year 2009/2010, which gives precise details of the non-lethal sampling conducted on blue, humpback, fin and southern right whales on that year25. Similar data are also available in the most recent JARPA II cruise report for the year 2012/201326. This gives details of the non-lethal experiments conducted, which included “Sighting distance and angle experiment”, “Photo-identification experiment”, “Biopsy sampling”, “Satellite tag”, “Vomiting and faecal observation”, “Marine debris observation”, and “Oceanographic survey”27.
43. With regard to sample sizes, the only requirement laid down in paragraph 30 of the schedule is that the proposal should specify “number, sex, size and stock of the animals to be taken”; while Annex P refers to the need to include a “sampling protocol for lethal aspects of the proposal”. The JARPA II plan includes such a protocol in Appendices 6-828. The statistical formula that is used to calculate the sample sizes is also reproduced in the Appendix to Appendix VI of the JARPA II plan. Fuller accounts of the sample size calculations and the statistical methodology used are set out in the JARPA II research plan and in its Appendices 3 to 8, which were submitted to the Scientific Committee of the IWC for comment in 2005. However, the experts presented by the Parties during the oral proceedings disagreed as to whether the sample size eventually determined by Japan for JARPA II is appropriate to the objectives of JARPA II.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

40 Turning now to the use of lethal methods and the scale of the sampling involved under JARPA II, it should be recalled that Article VIII of the Convention authorizes Contracting Governments to grant special permits to their nationals to kill and take whales for purposes of scientific research. subject to such restrictions and other conditions that the Government "thinks fit". At the same time, following the adoption of paragraph 30 of the schedule in 1979, the exercise of that right is subject to the review and commentary of the Scientific Committee of the IWC and the respect for the Guidelines issued by the Committee for that purpose,. namely Annex P. This annex, which was approved by consensus by all the States Parties to the Convention, requires, as indicated above, "an assessment of why non-lethal methods, methods associated with any ongoing commercial whaling, or analyses of past data. have been considered to be insufficient ". Thus, The Use of methods for purposes of Scientific Research lethal or non-lethal methods The insufficient consideration of Scientific Research in programs has to be Assessed and Justified, and is subject to review and comment by The Scientific Committee of The IWC.
41. Did Japan comply with these conditions and did it give adequate consideration to the use of non-lethal methods in JARPA II? Are such non-lethal methods used in JARPA II? The evidence submitted to the Court shows that the JARPA II plan clearly mentions the non-lethal methodologies which are to be employed in the programme, including "sighting" surveys, "ecosystem surveys" of the habitat environment of whales, "oceanographic and meteorological observations. . . ., Including Sea Ice, surface Temperature, Sea surface height and Chlorophyll Concentration alpha over The entire Research Area, using satellite Data "23.
42. Moreover, at the oral hearings, Counsel for Japan affirmed that "Japan has put much effort into non-lethal research methods" and that JARPA II "scientists have. . . had some success with biopsy sampling and satellite tagging of large, slow-moving whale species such as the humpback "24. As evidence, he referred to the Cruise Report of the JARPA II scientists for the year 2009/2010, which gives precise details of the non-lethal sampling conducted on blue, humpback, fin and southern right whales on that year25. Similar data are also available in the most recent JARPA II cruise report for the year 2012/201326. This gives details of the non-lethal experiments conducted, which included "Sighting distance and angle experiment", "Photo-identification experiment", "Biopsy sampling", "Satellite tag", "Vomiting and faecal observation", "Marine debris observation". , and "Oceanographic Survey" 27.
43. With regard to sample sizes, the only requirement laid down in paragraph 30 of the schedule is that the proposal should specify "number, sex, size and stock of the animals to be taken"; while Annex P refers to the need to include a "sampling protocol for lethal aspects of the proposal". The JARPA II plan includes such a protocol in Appendices 6-828. The statistical formula that is used to calculate the sample sizes is also reproduced in the Appendix to Appendix VI of the JARPA II plan. Fuller accounts of the sample size calculations and the statistical methodology used are set out in the JARPA II research plan and in its Appendices 3 to 8, which were submitted to the Scientific Committee of the IWC for comment in 2005. However, the experts presented by. the Parties during the oral proceedings disagreed as to whether the sample size eventually determined by Japan for JARPA II is appropriate to the objectives of JARPA II.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

40 Turning now to the use of lethal methods and the scale of the sampling involved under, JARPA II it should be recalled. That Article VIII of the Convention authorizes Contracting Governments to grant special permits to their nationals to kill. And take whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions and other conditions that the Government. "Thinks fit". At the, same timeFollowing the adoption of paragraph 30 of the schedule, in 1979 the exercise of that right is subject to the review and. Commentary of the Scientific Committee of the IWC and the respect for the Guidelines issued by the Committee for, that purpose. Namely Annex P. This annex which was, approved by consensus by all the States Parties to the Convention requires as indicated,,, Above."An assessment of why, non-lethal methods methods associated with any ongoing commercial whaling or analyses, of past data. Have been considered to be insufficient ". Thus the use, of lethal methods for purposes of scientific research or the insufficient. Consideration of non-lethal methods in scientific research programmes has to be assessed, and justifiedAnd is subject to review and comment by the Scientific Committee of the IWC.
41. Did Japan comply with these conditions. And did it give adequate consideration to the use of non-lethal methods in JARPA II? Are such non-lethal methods used in. JARPA II?The evidence submitted to the Court shows that the JARPA II plan clearly mentions the non-lethal methodologies which are. To be employed in the programme including ", sighting." surveys, "ecosystem surveys." of the habitat environment, of whales. "Oceanographic and meteorological observations..., including sea ice surface temperature,,Sea surface height and chlorophyll α concentration over the entire, research area using satellite data. "23.
42, Moreover,. At the oral hearings Counsel for, Japan affirmed that "Japan has put much effort into non-lethal research methods and that." JARPA II "scientists have... Had some success with biopsy sampling and satellite tagging, of large