This dispute has been ongoing since the establishment of the moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986 and, as result, the politicisation of science has seriously compromised the function of both the International Whaling Commission and its Scientific Committee. For either of the pro- or anti- whaling groups to get what they want would most likely require an amendment to the schedule - something which can only be achieved by a seemingly impossible (given that pro-and anti- whaling groups are almost equally split) three-fourths majority vote. The convention, as it stands, has therefore been described as "a pro-whaling convention giving effect to a Commission dominated by anti-whalers". It's no wonder then that all attempts at compromise have failed. So perhaps the court case at The Hague could shake things up a little?