Two protesters have been taken into custody after they boarded a Japanese whaling vessel in the Antarctic.
The Sea Shepherd campaign group said the two - a Briton and an Australian - had been assaulted and tied to the radar mast by the Japanese crew.

They said they wanted charges of kidnap to be filed in Australia.

Minoru Morimoto, of the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR), admitted the pair had been detained but denied they had been assaulted or harmed.

He said the Sea Shepherd's accusations that the two men were tied up were "completely untrue".

"It is illegal to board another country's vessels on the high seas. As a result, at this stage, they are being held in custody while decisions are made on their future," he added.

Legal injunction

The two - Australian Benjamin Potts and Briton Giles Lane - boarded the Yushin Maru 2 from the Sea Shepherd vessel the Steve Irwin.

In a statement, the group accused the Japanese crew of holding the two men hostage.

"Captain Paul Watson has notified the Australian Federal Police that he would like to see kidnapping charges brought against the Japanese whalers," the statement said.

The campaign group said the pair had intended to deliver a message informing the Japanese that it was now illegal to kill whales, because an Australian court had outlawed the practice.

A Federal Court judgement in Sydney ruled that it was illegal for the Japanese fleet to hunt whales, and ordered them to stop their expedition.

But Tokyo has said in the past that it will ignore any injunction resulting from the case.

The Japanese fleet plans to kill about 900 minke whales and 50 fin whales by mid-April as part of what it describes as a scientific research programme.

But Australia and other nations say the research goals could be achieved using non-lethal methods and call the programme a front for commercial whaling.

BBC News

lol it was only a matter of time.

^ That was bad decision by the Japanese whaler.

It will only increase publicity of Aussie activists.

Pity they weren't suicide bombers...
Yeah, I said it. Sue me.

According to the Sea Shepard Captain, they were there to hand the Japanese Whaling Ship an order from the Australian Federal Court. I'm not going to get into how illegal it is to board a sea going vessel without permission, we know it's illegal.

This is the Australian Government's PDF of its "Whale Sanctuary".

http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/speci...nctuary-map.pdf

If you take a look at the bottom of that PDF, there is something there called "The Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT)". Can someone tell me how Australian can claim a huge chunk of Antarctica like that? Who gave them permission to claim that land anyway?

It explains it right there that most jurisdictions don't recognise Australia's claims. I find a lot of Aussies don't seem to understand that. =D

Other countries including NZ and Chile have laid claim to certain parts of Antartica as have Canada and Russia laid claims to certain parts of the Artic. Some countries recognise this zone while others who look to benefit from these zones obviously do not. This is a completely seperate topic then the one being discussed here, so if someone wants to discuss this topic it should be done on a seperate thread, as I'd suggested earlier.

countries can lay claims on pretty much anything they want, its all on paper...the real occupants are the ones in the place that is in contest...just like the Spratley Islands

To a large extent I agree but the Antartic is largely unoccupied, so in otherwords in this sort of situation, first come, first served. Along with other countries Australia has a Zone that it manages in the Antartic, this is not in dispute. The area that the Japanese whalers are hunting in encroaches 200 miles within this territory or what is termed the Australian Exclusive Antartic Zone, which is a "law" I guess that has been ratified by the UN, that applies to seas surrounding a state. Other countries also exercise this right over other territories, so what Australia is doing is within its rights. Historically counties that have somthing to gain by violating this right often do so and this in essence is what Japan is doing.

So by that logic, if I walked by your car when you were at work, and no one lays claim to it. It's mine right?

Bomb Japanese Ships.

^ That's dumb. Someone else obviously owned the car previously. Antarctica is owned by no one.

Well Japan could always do what the Norwegians do and get out of the IWC and make their own whaling commission. :O

Owned by no one according to whom? How do you know there weren't tribal peoples that sail there long ago?

This is the stupidest logic I've heard in a long time. Firstly the car is already owned.

The purpose of this "law" is so that only the Americans can fish in San Fransisco Bay. So that only the Vietnamese can set up an oil well at the mouth of the Mekong Delta. This law isn't special to Australia, every country applies it to its own border and territory and is designed to protect the economic rights of every country. Without this law, Australia can send its fishing fleet into Tokyo bay and start dredging for scallops. Is this simple enough for you to understand or do I need to try and make it simpler still?

Who says Antarctica is Australia's territory? Antarctica is a totally different continent.

Just because someone names part of Antarctica Australian territory, doesn't make it so. Antarctica belongs to all the planets inhabitants, both Whale watchers and Whale hunters. You don't get to close off a section of it and declare it as your own. No one gave you that permission.

Has anyone made a claim for Antartica? No one, Antartica does not have a native human population. Besides, the British and Chile among other nations also have managed territories in Antartica, if you have a problem with Australia having one then you should also have a problem with any other country having one. Also any country who have a territory outside its own border ie the US should get out of Guam, Midway etc..

Claims according to who's record? European historians?


I agree, no more empire building! Midway and Guam belongs to Midway and Guam.

Yes and that is why I'm saying its contensious and is a seperate topic that should be discussed elsewhere. Firstly Australian Antartic Territory is officially recognised by the United Kingdom, New Zealand, France and Norway. Nobody has yet challenged Australia over its Sovreignty. However to maintain good relations in the region Australia only exercises its sovereignty in ways that are not contensious ie according to the Antartic Treaty. The only reason Japan would challange Australia's sovereignty would be to hunt whales there for commercial purposes which until recently was against the ruling of the IWC anyway.

At least Australia is trying to protect Antartica, all Japans intrests is in its exploitation and so far that is all Japan has done. The only unspoilt continent, and it wants to exploit it. Yup and you criticise Australia for doing something right and defend Japan for doing something morally wrong.

Australia has never tried to build an empire in Antartica, we have never tried to exploit it and have taken moves to protect it. There are no plans to commercially exploit Antartica. In fact we are trying to do the opposite, protect it from commercial exploitation by the Japanese and you it seems are defending Japans right to do exactly that. The question is, is it more important who "owns" Antartica, or who's prepared to protect it?

Well I've never heard of any people colonising Antarctica, and no one seems to be making claims to be the original population of Antarctica now anyway.

Well, in my opinion, Japan is only doing what the rest of the world is doin...going by any means to keep up with eonomy and try to become the dominant one in the world. Japan is not exploiting Antartica, there is nothing there to exploit!, they are hunting whales....in the ocean...where are borders drawn for an OCEAN?

I think this is a narrow minded view. Yes all countries look out for their economic success(but Japan has never claimed this as a reason for hunting whales) but at what expense? The Antartic treaty was signed specifically so no single country could exploit Antartica for thier own personal benefit, and that Antartica would be protected from things like overfishing.

You also need to look at a map. Territorial waters are drawn on maps all the time. Otherwise whats stopping Shell from erecting an oil rig in the middle of Tokyo Bay? There are rules ratified by the UN that determines how and where exclusive economic zones/territotial waters etc are drawn. Sometimes you don't always agree with what the UN has decided but there has to be general consessus for something like this to settle disputes, and these decisions are ratified by individual countries. If you disagree with it then you need to take it up with the UN and every nation that voted for it.

Territorial waters are determined by the border of the continental shelf of each country and the diplomatic resolve of past territorial disputes. But to be on topic, I would say using brute force will never solve an issue such as whaling activities, and there are more important ones for which we must take action. Also under international treaty both the Antarctica and the North Pole don't belong to any country, and therefore has no legitimate right to exploit its resource a country that does so, yet many countries such as the US, Russia and Canada are pushing the principle set, under the guise of legitimacy, to exploit the oil that reside in the North Pole. Every country has done questionable acts every now and then, so the critics should stop complaining. Whaling of course is bad, but the dependency of Japan on sea resources and its particular culture justifies whaling more so than other countries who practise such activities. Also, most treaties were decided by the Western nations due to their sheer numbers and influence, yet they represent only a fraction of world's population. So why a consensus among nations is viewed as just? Who has the right to say what is good or not, or simply better? I laugh at piteous Australia's attempt to try to take on a better appearance by criticizing Japanese whaling activities when they've committed a genocide in the past.

Claiming Antartica. What kind of bizzare $hit is this.

The Japanese are pretty nice and peaceful people. This whaling thing has really hurt their image in recent years.

They better stop for their own sake. I can see this issue having more negative repercussions for Japan than positive ones in the future.

I agree with you that the rights of countries to exploit natural resources are ambigious, but there are certain agreements that have been "ratified" by the UN that have been agreed as a consensus. Yes Australia has commited genocide in the past, a mistake which we are currently trying to rectify, but Japan can also hardly preach to us when Japan won't even admit let alone apologise for its atrocities during WWII, instead they are trying to change the text books taught in Japanese schools to play down Japan's "sins" of WWII.

Unlike the North pole Australia has never had any plans nor has any plans currently to even push the boundries of "legitimate" exploration.

Irrespective of Japans dependency on sea resources and its culture it does not justify over fishing or fishing in protected areas. Neither does this give Japan any special rights to hunt for whales. The fish stocks of the world have been overfished, we as a population need to cut back and start relying on farming rather then continuing to pillage wild fish stocks.

The treaty that protects the conservation of Antartica, the only unspoilt continent was signed in 1959 and as a result of this treaty, by and large there has not been any exploitation of its natural resources.

Irrespective though of whats happened in the past and who owns Antartica, the question at hand now is this, do you support Japan's right to exploit the natural resources of Antartica or Australia's attempt at protecting it. Any argument about weather Australia has any rights over the area is irrelevant.

I await your answer.

Listen I do not support Japan, but who cares? Whales are by definition still a limited natural resource, but cloning will help repopulate their species if need be. So what's the point of this? And who knows we might destroy the earth before they even become extinct.

Unlike sheep or cattle, cloning will not help repopulate whale stocks. But you're right we may well end up destroying the earth well before they become extinct.


I don't agree with killing whales but I'm not against Japan hunting whales either. I do believe though that Antartica should be protected and whaling should only be allowed if we can be sure that the population can sustain it, a decision that should be made by an indepenent body. I do criticise Japan though for circumventing the banning of whaling by the IWC in the past, all they've done is shown they can't be trusted.

All they have to do is stop eating Sashimi if I spell right!!!

fu-k the whales. What the Japanese are doing fully have my support. With trees in the Amazon forest are regularly being cut down result in less oxygen output into the atmosphere, the last thing i need is more whale breathing all of my oxygen through their blowholes. These useless pieces of $hit can't even breath under water like the rest off the marine life, so if the Japanese don't kill them i'll do it myself. They have million of years to evolve but they didn't! All they do is slack of and doing nothing productive. When was the last time a whale ever help you with anything? When my car broke down I don't see any whale offer help, It was my Muslim friend that help me fix that piece of scrap. I'm not impress with the jumping-out- of -the -water trick because i can do better. Last year I went fishing at a beach and some b!tch @$$ whale had to swim and die right there on the spot just for the sake of being a b!tch! As a result , the authority shut down the place and I couldn't fish!

Killing whales and other endanger species kick @$$!

Further though, a history of killing whales and Korean reinforce and strengthen my view of Japaneses as nice and peaceful people.