...the potential for this to open up for scrutiny our generally unrecognised claim on Antarctica, as well as the way we assert our maritime boundaries?
We didn't want that explored when East Timor was the potential plaintiff, in fact we didn't think much of the ICJ full-stop back then.
This is a thought that's occurred to me, rather than a well-researched hypothesis. But it does seem likely that the government will not take its rhetoric any further due to the risk that international litigation might prove to be a double-edged sword that swings back and maims us.
That and the possibility that it will hold that the whaling is sufficiently scientific, thereby robbing opponents of their legal objection...
UPDATE: well, well, it appears I might have been wrong. In my defence I didn't count on race and nationalism being such a hot spot in this Australian election. Again.
Capabilities as menus: A non-welfarist basis for QALY evaluation (Crosspost from Crooked Timber) - This is a contribution to a discussion of Sen’s capability approach, taking place at Crooked Timber. It’s a bit too wonkish for the CT readership, it seems...
9 hours ago