I have voted against the operative paragraphs 1(c) and (f) not because I disagree with the substance but because I believe they are issues which belong properly to the merits.

Australia, Japan and New Zealand agreed on a total allowable catch (TAC) of 11,750 tonnes in 1989 and subsequently decided each year to maintain the same, up to 1997. The disagreement arose because Japan wanted the TAC to be increased while Australia and New Zealand held a contrary view. The respective positions were based on the appreciation of scientific evidence. Since the Tribunal has admitted in paragraph 80 that it cannot conclusively assess the scientific evidence presented by the parties, it has no basis of prescribing an order that sets a TAC. That issue should be left to the arbitral tribunal to determine.