A US court's decision declaring anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd "pirates" could have potentially far-reaching implications, a University of Canterbury law expert says.
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals this week castigated Paul Watson and members of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society he founded for the tactics used in their relentless campaign to disrupt the annual Japanese whale hunt in the Southern Ocean.
In his decision summary, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski said to be a pirate "you don't need a peg leg or an eye patch".
"When you ram ships, hurl glass containers of acid, drag metal-reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders, launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks, and point high-powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate. No matter how high-minded you believe your purpose to be," Judge Kozinski said.
Law professor Karen Scott said characterising the activities of Sea Shepherd as piracy had potentially far-reaching implications for international law.