2024 ASIL Abroad Meeting - Geneva

Description:   The International Court of Justice has recently been in the spotlight for issues of international accountability and justice. Member States have turned to the court for advisory opinions, such as on climate change, or to uphold universal obligations under the Genocide Convention. Can the ICJ deliver on issues that seem to be otherwise stalled by political and diplomatic processes? Is this the proper role and use of the ICJ advisory proceedings and contentions cases? Can the ICJ meet the high expectations placed on it? How is the ICJ placed vis-à-vis other international tribunals dealing with similar issues? Join us for this roundtable discussion of the ICJ, back in style.

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Samuel Wordsworth KC, Essex Court Chambers
• Catherine Amirfar, Debevoise & Plimpton
• Vladyslav Lanovoy, Laval University
• Mona Rishmawi, United Nations

Description:   States’ legislative and administrative measures adopted to protect the stability of the financial sector may give rise to trade and investment disputes. In the WTO context, panels have examined whether the disputed measures affected trade in financial services in violation of WTO law (see, e.g., Argentina – Financial Services). Several investment treaty cases have also addressed major banking crises and the States’ measures in that connection (see, e.g., del Valle et al. v. Spain). In this context, and of interest to both investment and trade lawyers, certain investment treaties include “prudential reasons” exceptions which originate from trade law. The question thus arises as to how they will be interpreted in future investment disputes. What can investment law learn from the WTO case law in this connection? A discussion on these issues appears particularly timely in view of recent banking crises in the U.S. and Switzerland that have sparked renewed interest in the State’s regulatory space in the banking sector and investors’ rights under international instruments.

Confirmed Speakers:

• Amaia Rivas Kortazar, Pinsent Masons
• Joost Pauwelyn, The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
• Carlo Cantore, World Trade Organization
• Laurie Achtouk-Spivak, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
• Levent Sabanogullari, Permanent Court of Arbitration (moderator)

Description:   Panel members will critically discuss the consequences of transitional justice processes that exclude certain voices, and growing calls by international actors such as the United Nations, European Union, and third-party States for meaningful participation in them. Justifications for this emerging international legal norm will also be considered, and what consequences it may have for international actors working on transitional justice initiatives in transitioning societies. Their exchange will examine the possible international legal scope and content of this emerging norm (including the role of survivors of large-scale past human rights abuses, women, youth, and civil society generally), what inclusion and participation looks like in practice, the challenges and opportunities for realizing both, and international actors’ efforts to respect this emerging norm while working in transitioning societies.

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Claudia Jose, Swisspeace
• Barney Afako, United Nations Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan
• Mariana Casij Peña, Institute for Integrated Transitions (IFIT)
• Awa Dabo, Office of the Peacebuilding Support Office, United Nations Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs

Description:   The enforcement of arbitral awards against States remains a challenge in dispute settlement, with States often seeking to resist enforcement and investors finding new jurisdictions and strategies to secure enforcement. This panel will  explore the recent trends in the enforcement of awards against sovereign States, and provide a comparative perspective of the approach adopted by courts in several key jurisdictions where some landmark decisions have recently been adopted. The panel includes practitioners and academics, and will provide a comparative perspective of recent decisions in France, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

Confirmed speakers:

• Yasmin Mohammad, Fortress Investment Group
• Marnix Leijten, De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
• Carla Baker Chiss, Meyer Fabre Avocats
• Peter Griffin, Slaney Advisors
• William O’Brien, Eversheds Sutherland (moderator)

Description:  
Corporate liability for war crimes is a pressing issue at the crossroads of domestic and international law. From the Nuremberg IG Farben trial to the recent case against the French company Lafarge, the evolving legal landscape has long recognized that businesses can be instrumental in facilitating or perpetuating war crimes, whether through direct involvement, complicity, or contributions to conflict-related activities. Yet holding corporations accountable for their roles in war crimes remains complex and challenging, from determining the extent of their culpability to establishing appropriate legal frameworks. This session will delve into the complex terrain of corporate responsibility for war crimes, exploring the evolving legal frameworks and multifaceted considerations that shape the accountability of corporations in conflict zones. Experts will explore the challenges and opportunities inherent in holding corporations accountable for their roles in war crimes and analyze recent developments in the jurisprudence in this area.

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Philip Grant, TRIAL
• Jelena Aparac, Legal Action Worldwide
• Dorothée Baumann-Pauly, University of Geneva School of Economics and Geneva Center for Business and Human Rights

Description:   Approximately sixteen per cent of the population lives with one form of disability or another. In situations of armed conflict, this figure can rise to 18-30%. Armed conflict and emergency situations often exacerbate the barriers faced by persons with disabilities and place them at greater risk. For example, persons with sensory or intellectual disabilities may not be able to understand evacuation orders or respond to an outbreak of hostilities. They may be mistaken for the enemy because of their behavior deviates from the norm. Moreover, persons with mobility restrictions may be left behind because they cannot bring their assistive devices with them. Too often their particular situations and needs are overlooked by the authorities, armed groups, and humanitarian organizations. While the existing legal human rights and international humanitarian law frameworks are well developed, a more inclusive interpretation and application of these rules is required, which takes into account the specific risks and barriers faced by persons with disabilities in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This panel will simulate the preparation of an evacuation plan during an armed conflict situation to explore the challenges this poses for persons with disabilities and to reflect on the inclusive interpretation of the applicable IHRL and IHL to address their needs and respect their rights.

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Catalina Devandas Aguilar, Disability Rights Fund
• Janet Lord, Center for International and Comparative Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
• Michael Mwendwa, International Committee of the Red Cross
• Veronica Ngum Ndi, Community Association for Vulnerable Persons

Description:   Embark on a journey through time as we uncover the origins of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).  First, through a dynamic debate format, two distinguished speakers will explore whether ISDS has fulfilled the goals it was originally intended for. One speaker will explore the achievements and successes of ISDS, highlighting its role in promoting foreign investment, protecting investor rights, and fostering economic development. Conversely, the opposing viewpoint will scrutinize the shortcomings and unintended consequences of ISDS, raising critical questions about its impact on sovereignty, regulatory autonomy, and access to justice. Following the debate, two discussants will contribute additional perspectives, further enriching the dialogue.​

As the session unfolds, audience members will have the opportunity to gain insights into divergent interpretations of ISDS's historical trajectory, its effectiveness in achieving its original objectives, and the broader implications for the future of international investment law.

Confirmed speakers:

• Peter Tzeng, Foley Hoag LLP
• Lindsay Gastrell, Independent Arbitrator
• Joseph Benton Heath, Temple University
• Thomas Schultz, University of Geneva
• Luciana Ricart, Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP (moderator)

Description: Legal advisors at Permanent Missions in Geneva often handle a wide array of legal and diplomatic issues in a range of international fora. These include multilateral negotiations on thematic topics at the United Nations Human Rights Council, policy and strategic discussions during the quadrennial International Red Cross Conference, and negotiations on broader international instruments such as those on disarmament, the climate, and the environment. Join a discussion between legal advisors for a candid, “behind the scenes” look at what it is like to be a legal adviser in Geneva – the challenges, opportunities, working methods, best practices, benefits, and approaches of both smaller and larger Missions, and their efforts at consensus building between States during crises.

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Angel Horna, Permanent Mission of Peru to the United Nations
• Bafou Jeng, Embassy of The Gambia to The Swiss Confederation and Permanent Mission of The Gambia to the UN
• Mariam Khan, Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations
• Lucinda Stallard, United Nations Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect

Description:   Under customary international law expressed in Article 36, paragraph 2, of the International Law Commission’s articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the responsible State is under an obligation to compensate damage caused, covering any financially assessable damage. This rule is invoked and applied in a variety of legal settings, including and increasingly before international courts and tribunals considering inter-State claims (the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and inter-State arbitral tribunals) and bodies considering claims by non-State entities (most prominently regional human rights courts and investor-State arbitral tribunals). The panel proposes to address legal and policy issues raised by these developments.

Confirmed speakers:

• Donald McRae, University of Ottawa
• Veronika Fikfak, University College London
• Photini Pazartis, The Fletcher School, Tufts University
• Julian Arato, University of Michigan Law School (moderator)

By aiming “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels,” the 2015 Paris Agreement brought hope to scientists, activists and citizens calling for effective mitigation of the devastating impact(s) of climate change worldwide. Almost a decade later, such an agreement remains far from being implemented while the destruction of the natural environment continues unabated due to human economic activities, the lack of appropriate regulations, political unwillingness, insufficient means for implementation of adequate measures, armed conflicts, or a combination thereof. Against this bleak background, resort to litigation – before national, regional or international judicial bodies – has gathered pace, recently culminating in the demand, co-sponsored by more than 130 states at the UN General Assembly, for an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on States’ obligation to fight climate change.  This session will hear from the activists, litigators, and leaders directly involved in ongoing proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights and the ICJ, and in efforts towards future international criminal proceedings. It will also examine how such efforts contribute to not only bolstering advocacy but also pressuring policy makers to effectively (re)commit to reducing emissions and supporting climate-vulnerable populations, especially at UN Climate Change Conferences (“COPs”).

Confirmed speakers:

• Moderator - Joie Chowdhury, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) 
• Jessica Simor KC, Matrix Chambers
• H.E. Umsue Antas, Permanent Mission of Vanuatu to the United Nations in Geneva
• Maud Sarliève, Oxford Sustainable Law Programme and Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study

The prevention of atrocity crimes is a central component of the international human rights framework. Gender-based discrimination and inequality are risk factors for atrocity crimes, and violent acts based on power imbalances between gender identities have been identified as atrocity crimes by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It is thus imperative to mainstream gender in early warning indicators and systems, and to recognize the role that women can play in local and international responses. The atrocity prevention agenda must also be integrated into other global commitments and priorities, such as the women, peace, and security agenda. While numerous studies have shown that misogyny and oppression of women make societies poorer and more likely to engage in violent political instability, recent efforts to codify the crime of “gender apartheid” within the crimes against humanity draft treaty have raised new and interesting opportunities to recognize extreme, institutionalized gender‑based discrimination within the international criminal framework. Panelists will examine ways that States, civil society, peacebuilders, humanitarians, and local communities can ensure effective atrocity prevention and criminal justice responses to gender-based violence against women in order to address and prevent violence and armed conflict, as well as build sustainable peace.

Confirmed speakers:

• Andrew Clapham, The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (moderator)

Description: This panel will explore the use of peaceful methods in international dispute resolution as opposed to coercive measures. It will examine the peaceful dispute resolution methods outlined in Article 33 of the United Nations Charter, tracing their historical development and scrutinizing relevant examples, including State-State arbitration and investor-State arbitration, as well as other proceedings before international courts and tribunals and other international dispute resolution bodies. The panel will also analyze instances of successful and unsuccessful peaceful dispute resolution, elucidating their advantages and limitations, along with the factors contributing to successful outcomes. The session will also address coercive measures adopted by States, encompassing trade and investment sanctions, embargoes, freezing orders to military intervention and armed conflict, examining their legal framework, historical evolution, relevant practice, and the criteria guiding their adoption. It will assess the efficiency and impact of such measures, including their implications for human rights, the economy, and long-term stability. Drawing from contemporary and historical examples, the panel will thus evaluate the costs and benefits associated with the different approaches, while also examining the role of international organizations in the resolution of international disputes.

Confirmed speakers:

• Veijo Heiskanen, Independent Arbitrator
• Alison Macdonald KC, Essex Court Chambers
• Gabrielle Marceau, University of Geneva
• Noradèle Radjai, Lalive (moderator)