Written Observations of J a pan on the Declaration of Intervention of New ZeàÏaiid
1. J~pâii takès .notè ofthë decisicîn biNêw-Z.ëaj.âlid tô ë:i:èr9ise its rlght of iritervéntj~ri
:fu the case conceming Vlhalini:!· in the.Antarctic· fAustralia: v. Jaoan) pürstiant to Artide ....... ··•··-··' ··- - . ---·.
63: ofth~ Stafute oftbé Cow°(as ,;v~ll a$'.Ar.tides ·82:t<;> 85. qfthe: Rwes .~f Coμrt ,..,.:_ith the
·conseq_uënce tlïaMhe ëOD.stiilction'gtV~_n; p~/ ih~Ju~ffiJreQt: "-'ill, bê' ~ua~y "QindJng ûpdrj
'New'ieahmd. However, my Govemmenf:fe:eis comp:èlled to draw to the attention ofilie
Côï:Iri t_ëit~ _sêfioûs ~o~ës that w9~d arjse from the _aébμissfon of New Zeàlanêl· as
ru:i: iiitërvèno_r.
i. Thesë an~mi_!i4es ~~ fy(>1p. Qië corrt~xt ~ whièh the cμrreri't deèJ?i'~tiQP cif
intervention was filed by New Zeaiand: .This context is e·ddeilt from the Îoint Media
Rêlt$.é dàted 15 b.ecem:bér 2010, i~sueg.:fü the ~es. -of the Hon_ l(eyin Rμdd ~d tbe
H- .a n. s .M .! ·,I D·:· _é. ! S• M-·c Cûl.lY , t--e.. sP .·..ë c".t iveh•• .1 h.e Aû.s t.r ii-liâ-à and. 'N.L e.. w' Z.é â..l â.. nd. M.-. ini..s fêi-'s. fü-t
Foreign Aff'airs.A copy·ofithat press tëlease:-is attad1ed to these v.'Iittën observations;
3. The· :press telease recotâs, tliat "AtlStralla and },tew Zealand agreë on strategy for
~-halin~ legal cçJ.Se". This Joint Maji~ R~lèase,- issq~d six J:P.Ollths-after the Appiicatiol):
wa$"fil~q l:>y Aust:ralià, :ajâ!:;ës cl~if!.thàtth~ Applki:int "(has)•kepffu clo~e co@tatjdn
wifü the Government of New· Zeàlïmd about hô,v b'ëst to ,progress [theiij sruirê'd
,ani:i'-whalin~ pbjectiyes". i_ The ·statem:ent explâ.ins, the ratlonale .beb.ind the choice: of.
~clê 63 as the·,b~is f9t Né,\, 'Ze/1J_ai:i_d's-iritêfvèïi_tion âsJé?Hê?Vi's:·
"Ay$i!lià _bas- i~qicatèd that the~• \vtitild prëfer Néw Z~l:l.larid_ IlÇ)Ï to file as a
party. Beêause Ne,v Zeàla:nd bas. a jü.d$ë on the ICJ, Sir Keriileth K~itb, th~
joining of the two actions would restilt in Aostralia losing its: entiùement to
appoint a judge for the case."2
Mr. McCully stated that: "[t]oll9wfug the.Australian elections New Zeà1and \\fllS keen to
hem' Australia's -vièw prior to ma."lcing a dedsiqn on [hs) participation in the case".3
4; Australià's àims seem to ha,;e béen reaèhèd as a resuh of the steps takèn by Në\.·v
Zealand. New Zealand's decis1on to intervene in the case is stated to derive from "'its
long-standing participation- in the work of the International \Vbaling Commission, and
its views "\\-ith rèspect to the interpretation and application of the Convention, iricluding
1 Joint Media Relèase drued 15 Deceinber 20 lO, by the Hon. Kevin Rudd MP, Australiàn Minister
fotForeignAifaÏf!i, ând the·Hoi:J.. MurrayMc::.Cully MP, New Zeafand.Minister forForeign.Affairs,
"Aμstralia and New ·zealand B::,oree on strategy for whaling legai case",
2 Ibid. -
3 [pid.
wbiilingunder Specfal .Pérmit".:1 Howe\·er1 rèad in conjunctiôil v.ith the statemerit in,
the Join{Media Re1ease, that '·New Zeàland bas onc;e again ·con.finned_.that it i~'a strong
partii~"r of A;usb:al.i~ iQ. tlië bid to• epd 'sçjâitjfic' ,~•haling and hripiovè w~ë
c0risëi:vation \\'ôr1dv:ifüt5 ,.Nèv/Zéalimd appèârs'j;Winù:ifaëie tô fuliy sùpport AtistràÎ.ià's
case.
5. lbe equality ot:füe parties ~ill be at .!;eno.us.risk if States ar~ abl_e .to emba~koμ ''fon;n,
shopping",. !as it ,~ërë; 1Ïllcl by pùI:SUiiig wliât m;iy in effect bé ~ joint cas~ tiôdèr th~
r1.1Jrië .~f an· Artiëlè 6i intêrvëntiori, fo a"voièi some of the sàfuguards of ptoceduraJ
eqüàlity und°t'.r the Statute and Rules of the Court It is rtot difficult to iriforpret thechoièe
of..in(ef\iention widër .Artjclë 63 asa si:ràtegy dèsignèd \o-iï.voidhavii:ig to prove.
"ari. interest of a legal nature thàt .mày. be affected by the decisiort in the èasé,. as
requu~ ·under Article 62~, where the circumstances point to the existence of such.
i#tërêsfs · and :sμggêsi tli~: takiiig of. è"ài:êfp.lly i?fo4éfüatèd · procègûral ste-p~- fo ach•ance
tli~tj;l.
6; :fy~r~over, ~cle 31, p1friigraph 5; o_f tli~ St_àtμte c>f th~ Court and Articlè 36,-..
paragraph i, ofthe'Rules of Court exclüde the possibîliJ:y ofa_ppointmg a iudge·a.dhoc
wheu tW() :or mo:re ,paru es ~ in thé ~~e iptërés:t and t)iërèfÇ>rê ·are: io "bë Jeckotied aj
qiiè P.~" only'. 1JJ,is. i$ W.é"ça$~ _iμ thê :pre~~Ji!: disput~.
?; At tliê'tinie ofthe Applièant's appomûng,JtsJutjge qd hoi;~ my Govetnmèntèxpre'$sed,
in the ietter dated 22 Marclf2ôl1, its intention to reserve the right to-return to·the matter
~:i'f: that appointment. My Gov~mment now, wislies, tC> express its seàous doubts.
c,onceming tb,e èquàlity of the parties in tllèse proc_ëedings l?eforè the Court, and its
z;rof6und disc.omfort with the situation that te:Sults from the manner in which New
Zealand's intervention bas corne about.
8. Japan respectfully subrnits in. these circumstances that · particular care needs to be
takên wbën the Court deêides ôn. the ~er pr6cèdtiral steps iri this case, in order to
ensure the equality of the parties to the dispute. Tlûs need is es_pecially acute in this case,
where submissions on jurisdiction and on merits are being made together, and ,,.here
only one round ofwritten pleadings has been allowed.
9, fj1'$t; my Govemment submits that the wrirten 6bsen·atiàns that New Zealand may
prèsent in accordance with Article 86 of the Ru]es of Court should not be left witbout a
~ ·. . . ' . ' _DepJaration of New ZeaJand pursuant to Article 61 oftbe Sta~te of the Court by the Govemment
of~ew Zealand, 20 Nov::Iriber 2012, para.8. ·
5 Joint Media Release, op.cil.
1.
\\'.]:jttën tespôose frpfu the originàl partie~, Itj ëir~ùirisfcü!c~§ wh~e: there is collusion
bëTI'.~e:I,ithë .Appl,iëant and'the· Statè ,vish.ing"to futervene1 the intervenor's observations
wouid am.o@t in essence to a setond round of \i,Tit,'ten pleadings·by:the Applicant.; while
the Rêspqn~ërit has" no ôpj:,qrtùnity to rè~poiiâ,. Thêrêfürè; J~p_art r~iierates·its ·\VlSh to
1$vl;: $.e 9_ppcirtùnify to èx_press its•vie,~-s in;v.'i'iting on the subniissîon by Nèw Zealanci
on-the substance·,of the intervention, v..ithfu. an apprqpriate tüne.
10: Sêcend; my Govemment considers that, in the event thai thei.Qterventiori. by N'ew
Zealand is .admittèd; thé. ü:itëi:i•ëa:ing Si.ate shoüld have .only one· opportumty to make
oral s_uJ,rrûssjons, ~d, ~t tbis should take place after ,the fîi-st ro.Un'.d of the .oral
pÏeadmgs- by Australia and before that ofJapan; Fu.rthf)r, as tl:ie scope o.f the ,right ëif
interventi,9n u.n.q~r A.rtjçle q3 is éoμ.firi~d to "tl:te: p(>in! of irite;rp,r~t?tion_ v.hich'is ·in issue
iÏi fü~ p'rqc~~dil:igs, ân.d does rtôt ei"tend, tô gèneral in:terv·~ntion in• thê casl',6 my
GoVër.runent respectfully subniîts that .the· t'ime to1 be àllocated for the orctl p.l~d.ing by: ·
the:intervening.:Suite -should be sigriifica.i:iUy7lêss thân üi tpé ~e of irttërveritlc:in micre.r
A;rtjèll:! 62.
1J. Thitd, 111y 0àvern.i:@nt s11bmi~s th~: still in the èvë!it tbat 1he Întëtventîon by New·
Zëaland:is:admitted, the latter's intervention mth e _proeeedin~fü collaboration ,.,;th the
Applicant·should not result in any shortening ofthe·tiî:ne allqcàiêd to the R~sporid?rit for
·the preparatjôn.. of r~onse to, the pl~.4.ing~ by the Applicant anèr aiso by the
Întëi:véitl.n~ State. Japâh v.ri.shes to ·em,phasise the need for adçquate time fm:
·. -:pre_p.aration before its oJJl} proceedfu~~. bq"Ui m tnC? fi.ci,t ariç. gie seoànd Ïoimds,
··e~.i:l~çiâ.lly given that there has bee!} ohly qn.è !ciünd of writtën pleadings in this
tëch:iiièally complex case and- tbat the Applicant fa yeno respond to the Respondent's
objection to jurisdiction;
Nobukatsu Kanebara
Agent of Japan
6 Case coriëerriiifg Gonnnental •Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan A.rab Jamahiriva). Application by Malta for
P~j,'iiissi9nJP Infërv~;Jaéj__ê:ment, 14 April 1981. para,26, p.1:5.
'. :1 .• : i · · ·
,1,_ •. _::.
.1:::!J,
·:.-11:
11•1
~ 1 ·'! ·
Australia and New Zealand agree on strategy for whaling legal case, media release, 15 ... l /1 ...-::-~
The Hon ][{evin Rudd MP
Australian Minister for Foreign Mfairs
Australia and New Zealand agree on strategy for whaling lega~ case
Joint Media release
m Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, The Hon Kevin Rudd MP
e New Zealand Minister for Foreign Affairs, The Hon Murray McCully MP
15 December 201 O
The New Zealand Government has decided not ta file as a party ta Australia's legal action in the International Court of
Justice agalnst Japanese 'scientific' whaling in the Southern Ocean, but will instead 'intervene' forrnally in the case, a
move welcomed by the Australlan Government.
Foreign Ministers Kevin Rudd and Murray McCully say that bath countries have agreed ta work together towards the
elimlnation ofwhaling in the Southern Ocean through complementary strategies.
Mr Rudd welcomed the New Zealand decision ta intervene in the case as pragmatic, and reflecting Australia's
preference.
"New Zealand has once again confirrned that il is a strong partner of Australia ln the bld ta end 'scientific' whaling and
improve whale conservation worldwide," Mr Rudd said.
"By lntervening in the case, New Zealand will be able to make both written and oral submlssions to the Court that
Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean is contrary to ils obligations under applicable international conventions ta
which Australia and New Zealand are also Parties.
'We have kept in close consultation with the Govemment of New Zealand about how best to progress our shared antiwhaling
objectives. We are very pleased with the valuable support New Zealand will lend to this vital case."
Mr McCully said that the Cabinet had thls week agreed to his recommendatlon to intervene in the case but not to file as
a party.
"Following the Australian elections I indicated ta Mr Rudd that New Zealand was keen to hear Australia's view prior to
making a decision on our participation in the case," Mr McCully sald.
"Australia has indicated that they would prefer New Zealand no! to file as a party. Because New Zealand has a judge
on the ICJ, Sir Kenneth Keith, the joining of the two actions would result in Australia losing ils entitlement to appoint a
judge for the case. New Zealand's decision to intervene will allow the case to proceed without delay.
"With this decision made, we have begun ta focus on new diplomatie and communications strategies to try ta persuade
Japan to end whaling in the Southern Ocean. With this in mind, 1 have spoken ta Japan's Foreign Minister Seiji
Maehara ta explore the room for further diplomatie initiatives," Mr McCully sald.
Media inquiries
111 Minlster's office: (02) 6277 7500
11 DFAT Media Liaison: (02) 6261 1555
http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/releases/20 I 0/kr_mr_l 0 1215.html 2011/03/09
Written observations of Japan on the Declaration of Intervention by New Zealand