http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
The Case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic(Australia v. Japan; New Zealand intervening)
이석우 인하대학교 법학연구소 2013 法學硏究 Vol.16 No.3
The Case Concerning Whaling in the Antarctic is primarily based on a dispute over the interpretation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW). Article VIII provides that “any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research . . . .” (emphasis added). Utilizing this exception, Japan announced the Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic (JARPA) in the 1987/88 season. Japan commenced the Second Phase of the Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic (JARPA II) during the 2005/6 season. The stated objectives of JARPA II include monitoring the Antarctic ecosystem, modeling competition among whale species, clarifying changes in stock structure, and improving the management of minke whale stocks. After research is conducted, meat from harvested whales is sold for consumption and profits are used to support the Institute for Cetacean Research. On 31 May 2010, Australia instituted proceedings against Japan in the ICJ. Australia filed its memorial on May 9, 2011, and Japan filed a counter-memorial on March 9, 2012. On 20 November 2012, New Zealand filed a Declaration of Intervention in the Registry, and the Court granted permission to intervene on 6 February 2013. Australia claims that Japan’s large scale whaling under JARPA II violates its obligations under the ICRW, as well as its other international obligations for the preservation of marine mammals and marine environment under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Japan however argues that the Court lacks jurisdiction over Australia’s claims, and that, as a result, New Zealand’s application to intervene lapses. In the alternative, Japan argues that Australia’s claims should be rejected because the whaling activities are conducted for the purposes of scientific research, which is permitted under the ICRW. Australia counters that Japan is engaging in commercial whaling under the guise of “research.”A public hearing was held from on 26 June to 16 July 2013. The Court’s judgment will be rendered at a public sitting but is not expected for several months. This is the first time for Japan to appear as a party to a dispute at the ICJ. For Australia, it is the first time since the 1973 Nuclear Test case for the country to institute proceedings; it last appeared in the ICJ as the Respondent in the East Timor case which began in 1991. If the judgment is unfavorable to Japan, the country might withdraw from the IWC. In the past, Japan has threatened to do so and form an alternative – and presumably more whaling-friendly – organization. Such actions will probably initiate a domino effect among other pro-whaling countries. Alternatively, if the judgment favors Japan, the IWC may regain credibility among pro-whaling countries that feel isolated due to the organization’s increasingly conservationist stance. In addition, such a decision may encourage anti-whaling countries to be more flexible in their stance against whaling.
일본의 후쿠시마 원전 오염수 해양방출: 현황, 쟁점, 그리고 과제
이석우,정봉훈 전북대학교 동북아법연구소 2024 동북아법연구 Vol.17 No.4
Regarding the maritime areas beyond national jurisdiction of individual states, the consistently evolving norms of the international marine environment have adopted a forward-looking stance. Japan’s argument that the discharge of radioactive contaminated water from a nuclear power plant is simply not a violation of international law and is comparable to the emission standards of neighboring countries is disappointing as it indicates Japan’s attempt to evade international legal responsibility by complying with the bare minimum of international legal standards. In cases where scientific evidence is required, it is necessary to consider the high probability that prolonged litigation could fail to prevent the discharge of contaminated water. Even if the litigation is successful, there is no guarantee that it would effectively sanction Japan's discharge. Conversely, if the litigation were to end in defeat, there is concern about the potential legitimization of Japan's discharge. Furthermore, at present, it is unclear which sovereign state may bring suit in the context of these international legal proceedings. Therefore, it is important to approach the issue with a long-term policy perspective rather than a narrow assessment solely focused on the current discharge decision. It is worth emphasizing once again that the nuclear accident Japan experienced during the 2011 Tōhoku Earthquake and Tsunami in Japan is a disaster that can occur in any country that uses nuclear power. History has proven this. And yet there is a clear lack of international norms specifically addressing the disposal of nuclear waste into the ocean. Hence, Japan's action regarding the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant is a significant precedent that provides a valuable opportunity for the international community to dictate the direction it aims to pursue. Failing to seize such an opportunity would be a regrettable occurrence for the international community.
이석우,정미진,장동욱,김주현 한국공업화학회 2020 한국공업화학회 연구논문 초록집 Vol.2020 No.-
We have prepared organic photovoltaic cells using three quinoxalinebased conjugated polymers with triphenylamine group. The electrondonating indacenodithiophene (IDT) unit was linked to the quinoxaline which consists of two triphenylamine groups. The polymer was successfully synthesized via Stille coupling to form PIDT-Qx2TPA. Also, the fluorine atom as the electron-withdrawing substituent was systematically introduced to the chemical structure of the quinoxaline monomers to form PIDT-Qx2TPAF and PIDT-Qx2TPA2F. These all polymer devices were fabricated based on an inverted-type structure with ITO/ZnO/Polymer:PC71BM/MoO<sub>3</sub>/Ag configuration. Therefore, this study can explain the correlation with fluorine substituent in the quinoxaline structure with two strong electron-donating triphenylamine groups.