To What Extent Do Japan’s Post-2014 Whaling Practices Demonstrate Shortcomings in Existing International Legal Frameworks, Thereby Supporting the Case for Criminalizing Biodiversity Destruction Under International Law?

The legal protection of biodiversity is increasingly recognized as a matter of international concern. Nevertheless, the accelerating decline of biodiversity raises significant concerns regarding the effectiveness of existing legal frameworks, exposing structural limitations. This paper argues that the structural failures of the existing international whaling regime, as demonstrated by Japan's post-2014 conduct after the International Court of Justice judgment of 2014 ruling its whaling programs unscientific, provide a compelling legal basis for the criminalization of biodiversity destruction through the incorporation of ecocide as a fifth core crime under the Rome Statute. This argument is anchored in the International Court of Justice's landmark ruling Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan, New Zealand intervening) [2014] International Court of Justice Reports of Judgments 226, which found Japan’s scientific whaling programme inconsistent with the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, yet demonstrably failed to produce lasting compliance. Accordingly, this paper contends that institutional failure in biodiversity protection is characterized by weak enforcement mechanisms, limited regulatory scope, and a structural accountability deficit. This is examined through a case study of Japan’s state conduct, with particular focus on the International Whaling Commission’s institutional capacity to secure meaningful biodiversity protection, revealing specific enforcement deficiencies, regulatory gaps, and a structural accountability deficit that existing frameworks have proven unable to remedy. Collectively, this justifies the proposal for international criminalization of biodiversity destruction as the fifth core crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.