CLEAN : Japan disappointed by ICJs whaling decision

The transcript discusses a court ruling on Japan's whaling practices, specifically the Jarpa 2 program. Japan, respecting international law, will abide by the decision, which may influence whaling activities in other countries like Iceland and Norway. However, the ruling does not automatically protect endangered species such as humpbacks and fin whales. The decision highlights the need for a solid scientific program to justify any future whaling activities.

What was Japan's reaction to the court ruling on its research whaling program?

• Japan expressed regret and disappointment but agreed to comply.

• Japan decided to ignore the ruling.

• Japan was pleased with the ruling.

• Japan planned to appeal the decision.

Which countries, besides Japan, continue whaling practices in the 21st century?

• Russia and China

• Iceland and Norway

• Australia and New Zealand

• United States and Canada

Does the court ruling automatically protect endangered whale species?

• Yes, all endangered species are now protected.

• No, only humpbacks are protected.

• Yes, but only in certain regions.

• No, the ruling does not automatically protect endangered species.

What does the court ruling state about the Japanese killing program?

• It is banned completely.

• It meets standards but could include killing certain whales if scientifically justified.

• It does not meet the required standards.

• It meets all international standards.

What could allow the continuation of whaling under the court's ruling?

• Public support for whaling.

• A change in government policy.

• A solid scientific program that includes whale killing.

• A new international treaty.