By Masayuki Sakamoto
Africa’s elephants continue to be in crisis due to poaching for trading their ivory, and domestic markets for ivory have been closing worldwide to combat this crisis. The 18th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP18) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) adopted a decision, aimed at promoting the implementation of the recommendation on the closure of domestic ivory markets included in Resolution Conf.10.10 amended at CoP17, which states “the Parties that have not closed their domestic markets for commercial trade in raw and worked ivory are requested to report to the Secretariat for consideration by the Standing Committee to CITES at its 73rd and 74th meetings on what measures they are taking to ensure that their domestic ivory markets are not contributing to poaching or illegal trade.” The Government of Japan (GoJ) submitted reports under the CITES Decision and insisted that “Japan has been implementing stringent measures to ensure that its domestic ivory market is not contributing to poaching or illegal trade”. Most importantly, Japan demonstrates a new business registration requiring ivory dealers to fulfill all requirements for registration and renew their registration every five years; a 100%-registration-mandate on whole tusks when they renew or initially receive their business registrations; maintenance of inventory data including transaction records and traceability information records for cut pieces; and, increased scrutiny of the registration of whole tusks by requiring the result of radiocarbon dating…..
-
However, GoJ’s claims of stringent market controls are flawed and unjustified. Firstly, according to the GoJ’s report, raw and worked ivory dealers must be registered. In this case, they must fulfill all requirements for registration, which requires renewal every five years. But, our analysis of the GoJ’s examination of eligibility of the business registration renewal indicates that businesses are being registered via a token examination with a lack of scrutiny by the competent authorities. Specifically, the reality of the examination of applications for business registration is that the competent authority has left it solely to the authorized private organization, even for the applications by kingpin dealers with track records of illegal trade engagement. Thus, it is obvious that the examination of business registration and renewal is in name only, and it has not exerted any effect on excluding problematic dealers. Secondly, GoJ insists ivory dealers must register all (whole) tusks in their possession when they renew or initially receive their business registrations. This approach is a countermeasure to the problem of unregulated unregistered whole tusks owned by the businesses; the Japanese domestic law requires whole tusks to be registered prior to transactions, however, exempts them from being registered as far as the owner does not intend to transfer them (even the case of tusks stocked by dealers for being consumed as raw material). Thus, it should be questioned whether the 100%-registration-mandate on whole tusks realized the goal of regulating the stockpile of registered dealers through the whole tusk registration or not. Our analysis indicates that registered dealers successfully evaded this requirement by cutting their whole tusks into pieces and then processing them into hanko beforehand.
Japan: Japan Tiger and Elephant Fund, 2022. 24p.