Anti-whaling activists slam decision to issue international arrest warrants

Wednesday 20th August, 03:28 PM JST

LONDON —

A group which disrupted a whale hunt in the Antarctic Ocean last year criticized a decision by Japanese courts on Monday to issue arrest warrants against three of its members. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society said the move would not affect its plans to interfere with Japan’s whaling program when it resumes in the same ocean in December. On Monday, Japanese courts issued warrants for the arrest of three activists from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society after police claimed the activists managed to halt a Japanese whaling vessel by entangling a rope around the ship’s propeller in waters south of New Zealand on Feb. 12, 2007. Police also suspect they threw smoke candles on to the ship, the Kaiko Maru. Additionally, the ship was struck by Sea Shepherd’s vessel the Robert Hunter after being sandwiched between it and another ship belonging to the group, it is alleged.

In a statement, the group said all its actions are lawful and nonviolent. Captain Paul Watson, who heads the society, said he was surprised that no charges had been brought against himself as he was in overall charge of operations on that day. He dismissed claims that the Robert Hunter rammed the Kaiko Maru and said that it was, in fact, the other way around. In a statement posted on the group’s website, he said, ‘‘There is no doubt that this is politically motivated. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is not protesting whaling, we are opposing illegal whaling in accordance with the principles of the United Nations World Charter for Nature. If our activities are illegal then the warrant would be addressed to me, not to three non-officer volunteers.’’ This is the first time that Japanese police have pressed criminal charges against anti-whaling activists, but it is uncertain how successful they will be in apprehending the two Americans and one Briton. Japan has an extradition treaty with the United States but it is unclear whether the authorities in Washington and London would willingly hand over the accused, particularly if they felt the charges were politically motivated or trivial.

Kyodo

Latest 15 of 151 Total Comments Show All

cleo at 10:03 AM JST - 26th August

"The only damage done was to slow their progress in butchering whales"

That's not damage, it's headway.
AlfGarnett at 10:09 AM JST - 26th August

I agree with Cleo. If them whaler was not doing bad things and butchering them whales, then demonstrators wouldnt bother them. If Them whaler hadnt done nuffink to offend people, then people wouldn`t be against them.

Me daughter Rita, took me to Australia to watch whales, they was beautifull massive things. People who kill `em slowly and eat them are nutters.
browny1 at 12:52 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales -

You keep avoiding / fobbing a direct answer to the simple question of what constitutes terrorism as opposed to criminal acts.

Criminal charges against the ss and terrorist charges are vastly different.

Entangling a propeller may or may not be very dangerous but does it constitute a crime or an act of terror?

Please elaborate?
Bilderberg666 at 01:34 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales;

Dont you look at other peoples point of view. Dont dismiss otegrs as terrorists etc. The idea of issuing arrest warrants, show Japan to be petty and pathetic, just like most of the pro whaling posts on here.

Whales are for watching, not for eating.
TJrandom at 01:44 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales -

It seems to me that the whalers are the terrorists under your abbreviated definition. Using terrorism on the high seas and butchering whales as a means of coercing the rest of the world.
ihope2eatwhales at 01:55 PM JST - 26th August

"Using terrorism on the high seas and butchering whales as a means of coercing the rest of the world."

There is no coercing.

SS crazies try to coercing us to stop normal activity of catching whales, by dangerous violent acts. This is why they are regarded as terrorists, and arrest warrants are taken.
Bilderberg666 at 02:16 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales,

Regarding their whaling activities, yes these countries are pariah states, who lose respect for their whaling policy.

Whaling is supported by a very few, people who understand the suffdering of whales, would not support them, unless they have some kind of sadistic streak, i would guess.

Moderator: Readers, please keep the discussion focused on the arrest warrants.
TJrandom at 02:39 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales -

It is unclear from the article what the arrest warrants are for – but certainly it is not for terrorism – as the word is not used in the article.

Possible claims could be: not maintaining safe distance between ships, not giving the right of way on the high seas, pollution ala the stinky liquid, etc. As for the “damage” caused by two ships which touch – one could legitimately claim the whalers caused the damage – since by definition, if the butchers were not there in the first place, they could not have collided with the SS. Maybe it is time for arrest warrants to be issued for the whale butchers?
cooeecobber at 02:50 PM JST - 26th August

Tjrandom - An arrest warrant for international poaching, naming the Japanese whaling fleet, was issued on 5th August. The authority for the warrant, is the UN World Charter for Nature.
ihope2eatwhales at 03:10 PM JST - 26th August

Demonstrations are accepted. Violent attacks are not accepted.

Learn this common sense.
cleo at 03:13 PM JST - 26th August

The crewmen of whaling vessels are not innocent. They are there for the express purpose of butchering whales and they do not give a damn for the unspeakable suffering they inflict.

If the anti-whalers were really committing terrorist acts - boarding the death ships and then blowing themselves up, flying kamikaze planes into the whaling ships, etc - then I would say the arrest warrants were justified (but also meaningless, since the 'terrorists' would by definition be dead). As it is the big tuff whalers who are quite happy firing off exploding harpoons at innocent marine mammals cannot take it when someone tries to jam their propeller. Crybaby wussies. Happy to dish it out where there's no comeback, but can't take it.
browny1 at 03:20 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales-

You still haven't answered my simple question.

In any mature discussion, it is always important in order to strengthen your case, to intelligently answer a question put forward.

I honestly want to hear your explanatory opinion re defining terrorism.

It is important for understanding your reaction to the article.

Learn this common sense.
ihope2eatwhales at 03:51 PM JST - 26th August

My definition is standard one. Same as Wikipedia or dictionary.
TJrandom at 04:17 PM JST - 26th August

ihope2eatwhales -

My definition is standard one.

The would you agree that to be called terrorism that it must be an action designed to maim, or kill, and be indiscriminant in nature in order to cause fear and to coerce due to this fear? (these are my own words, in restating what my dictionary says is the definition of terrorism.)

If this is what the SS crew did, then they should be arrested for terrorism - but if not, then maybe for a lesser charge - like failure to yeild right of way, or polution on the high seas?
tkoind2 at 10:50 AM JST - 27th August

This whole thing is a farse. Japan doesn't want their whaling laundry aired too publicly. And these guys don't want to be charged as terrorists.

I say the group should leverage this charge and warrant to bring even greater attention to Japan's whaling policy. Make this decision backfire on them in ways they cannot imagine today.