‘RAMMING SPEED’: THE SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY AND THE LAW OF PROTEST GERRY NAGTZAAM* AND DOUGLAS GUILFOYLE** This paper examines the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society as a radical environmental protest group in its self-appointed role in protecting oceanic life. It frst briefy examines the group’s history, its attitude to direct protest, its governing philosophy and its attitudes to violence as a means of achieving its goals. It then provides a history of various direct actions carried out by the group: in particular, it examines the organisation’s ongoing confrontations with the Japanese whaling feet. The paper goes on to critically evaluate the legal justifcations claimed by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society for its actions. In particular it assesses the group’s conduct under various international law of the sea conventions and instruments, including the controversy as to whether its activities constitute vigilantism and/or piracy. Lastly, the paper concludes by asking whether Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s methods have become counterproductive to its stated goals. I INTRODUCTION Since its inception in 1977 the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (‘SSCS’) has gone about its self-appointed task to protect the oceans from ongoing human destruction using both nonviolent and violent protest methods. 1 Over that time the SSCS has grown from one ship seeking to end Canadian sealing to a global franchise tackling issues ranging from over fshing to whaling, with multiple ships and a multi-million-dollar budget. 2 The group’s protest strategies and tactics are designed to be media-friendly, and often include using violence to infict property damage to prevent its opponents’ activities. Such practices have included ramming whaling vessels; boarding ships; interfering with ships’ propellers by fouling them with ropes; and throwing butyric acid (rancid butter) onto whaling ships’ decks to taint whale meat and render it unft for sale. 3 Further, the SSCS has publicly claimed to have sunk 1 Sea Shepherd, Mission Statement (2018) <http://www.seashepherd.org/mission-statement>. 2 Sea Shepherd, Home Page (2018) <http://www.seashepherd.org>. 3 Teale Phelps Bondarof, ‘Sailing with the Sea Shepherds’ (2011) 13(3) Journal of Military and Strategic Studies 1, 42–3 n 72; Amanda M Caprari, ‘Lovable Pirates? The Legal Implications of the Battle between Environmentalists and Whalers in the Southern Ocean’ (2010) 42 Connecticut Law Review 1493, 1508; Anthony L I Mofa, ‘Two Competing Models of Activism, One Goal: A Case Study of Anti-Whaling Campaigns in the Southern Ocean’ (2012) 37 Yale Journal of International Law 201, 209. * Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Monash University. ** Associate Professor, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of New South Wales Canberra.