The ASIL Annual Meeting

ASIL welcomed these honorees and keynote speakers at the 2019 Annual Meeting

Stephen G. Breyer
Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court

(Manley O. Hudson Medalist)

Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein
former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

(Goler T. Butcher Medalist)

Mónica Pinto
University of Buenos Aires Law School

(Honorary Member Award and Assembly Speaker)

Chile Eboe-Osuji
President, International Criminal Court

(Friday Keynote Address)

Peter Tomka
Judge, International Court of Justice

(Brower Lecturer)

Jennifer Newstead
Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State

(Hudson Luncheon Discussant)

Martti Koskenniemi
University of Helsinki

(Grotius Lecturer)

Anne Orford
University of Melbourne

(Grotius Distinguished Discussant)

Tracy Robinson
Faculty of Law, University of the West Indies

(Prominent Woman in International Law Award)


International Law as an Instrument

From March 27-30, 2019, the American Society of International Law convened its 113th Annual Meeting. The ASIL Annual Meeting Committee (chaired by Rebecca Ingber, Neha Jain, and Rahim Moloo) thanks all who attended and contributed to this year's meeting, which addressed the theme of "International Law as an Instrument."

---VENUE---
Washington Hilton
1919 Connecticut Ave NW
Washington, DC 20009


Annual Meeting theme:

Actors on the international stage use a variety of tools to address their concerns, from climate change to economic development; from humanitarian crises to cross-border disputes; from commercial regulation to global trade. Governments and international organizations employ diplomacy and coercion, corporations use negotiation and persuasion, and non-governmental organizations engage in fact-finding and advocacy. And all of these actors affect and are affected by international law and use the international legal system to effectuate change and solve problems.
 
The 2019 Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law (ASIL) focused on the distinctive ways international law serves as an instrument that national and international actors invoke and deploy, and by which they are constrained. How does international law shape the perceptions of the interests and problems of diverse global actors and help frame solutions? Is international legal language a useful medium for the development and dissemination of globalized norms? Under what conditions is international law most effective? Are international institutions effective instruments for addressing complex global challenges?
 
At the 2019 Annual Meeting, ASIL invited international lawyers from all sectors of the profession, policymakers, and experts from other fields to reflect on the different ways in which international law plays a role in identifying and resolving global problems.

Thematic Tracks:

  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration
  • Dispute Resolution
  • Foreign Relations and National Security Law
  • Global Commons
  • International Business
  • International Peace and Security


Ancillary Events

ASIL Executive Council Orientation

March 27 - 08:30 AM - 10:00 AM
(Fairchild East)

Ancillary Events

ITA-ASIL Conference

March 27 - 09:00 AM - 12:30 PM
(Columbia 7, 9, 10)

Separate registration with the ITA is required.

Ancillary Events

ASIL Executive Council Meeting

March 27 - 10:30 AM - 16:00 PM
(Columbia 3-4)

ITA-ASIL Conference Luncheon

March 27 - 12:30 PM - 14:00 PM
(International Terrace)

Separate registration with the ITA is required.
IG Business Meetings/Sessions

Intellectual Property Law IG

March 27 - 13:00 PM - 16:30 PM
(Du Pont)

IG business meeting.

Annual Meeting Registration Opens

March 27 - 14:00 PM - 10:00 AM
(International Terrace)

Ancillary Events

Victims of Hate Crimes in the Criminal Justice System: A Practical Guide

March 27 - 14:30 PM - 16:00 PM
(Fairchild West)

As hate crimes are a major issue of concern for many Americans and in countries around the world, this 90-minute side event will discuss tools and programs to address hate crimes in the 57 Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) participating States (pSs), with emphasis on meeting the needs of hate crime victims. Speakers from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) will be joined by hate crime specialists from US DoJ, DoS and civil society to discuss initiatives to address hate crimes domestically and globally.National authorities across the OSCE region are responsible for addressing hate crimes, yet are often poorly equipped to do so. Most OSCE participating States (53) have provisions in their criminal codes, which specifically address bias motivation and list protected characteristics. These hate crime laws are, however, often unused, used sporadically, or their application lacks consistency. Specialized training on hate crimes for police or prosecutors, committed to by the participating States in the OSCE commitments, often does not exist or is formalistic and limited in scope. These training gaps are accompanied by missing operational guidance for police and prosecutors. Lack of implementation of criminal hate crime provisions can result in the feeling of impunity for perpetrators, and further deepen mistrust of the victims and their communities towards the criminal justice systems.
Panelist(s):
  • Christie J. Edwards (Moderator)
  • Ales Giao Hanek (Speaker)
  • Jordan Long (Speaker)
  • Karen L. Stevens (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law IG

    March 27 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    Aslı Ü. Bâli, Professor and Faculty Director of the Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA Law, will discuss transitional justice initiatives in Libya, Syria, and Yemen. In the midst of armed conflict, transitional justice measures are being promoted in these countries as a response to mass human rights violations. Professor Bâli will put these developments in a regional context and discuss how these initiatives differentially implicate domestic, regional, and international actors.
    Keynotes & Plenaries

    Grotius Lecture: Enchanted by the Tools? International Law and Enlightenment

    March 27 - 17:00 PM - 18:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Panelist(s):
  • Martti Koskenniemi (2019 Grotius Lecturer)
  • Anne Orford (Distinguished Discussant)
  • Receptions & Luncheons

    Grotius Reception

    March 27 - 18:30 PM - 20:00 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Co-sponsored by the American University Washington College of Law and Hal S. Shapiro, Partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.

    Ancillary Events

    AJIL Board of Editors Meeting & Dinner

    March 27 - 18:40 PM - 22:00 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    By Invitation Only

    Ancillary Events

    Colleague Societies Breakfast

    March 28 - 07:45 AM - 08:45 AM
    (Holmead East)

    By Invitation Only -- Sponsored by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)

    Coffee Break

    March 28 - 08:30 AM - 09:00 AM
    Global Commons

    Who's Minding the Farm? Trade Law and Agricultural Exports

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    It is widely agreed among economists that tariffs remain a major impediment to the financial security of farmers, particularly in the developing world, with clear corresponding implications for the long-term financial feasibility of agriculture in these countries. World Trade Organization members have agreed to eliminate export subsidies for agricultural products and to restrain export measures that have a similar effect on distorting prices in world agricultural markets ("Nairobi Package" 2015). However, despite these stated objectives, geopolitical realities make it clear that we are moving away, rather than towards these goals. For example, U.S. farmers now find the huge Chinese market partially closed in response to the current Administration's decision to levy tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods. In response, the Administration is offering an additional 12 billion dollars in subsidy-like support to U.S. farmers. Such steps raise questions regarding compliance with international trade agreements, which seek to eliminate subsidies that distort global agricultural markets and that have enormous consequences for farmers in the developing world. A roundtable of agricultural and legal experts will assess the commitments made in the Nairobi package in light of these recent geopolitical developments and discuss the implications of these developments for UN Sustainable Development Goal #2, which aims to "end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture."
    Panelist(s):
  • Jeannette Tramhel (Moderator)
  • Mohammed Coulibaly (Speaker)
  • Marsha Echols (Speaker)
  • Edwini Kessie (Speaker)
  • Katrin Kuhlmann (Speaker )
  • Sophia Murphy (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Obligations to Negotiate and Consult: Worthwhile tool or exercise in futility?

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Are obligations to negotiate or consult a tool of international law which States have at their disposal for helping to resolve their problems? Does the claim of an obligation to negotiate or consult bring States to the negotiating table or does it have the opposite effect? In the same vein, most investment treaties include a clause that encourages or obliges the parties involved in a dispute to engage in consultations and negotiations. In practice, however, is there any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that these obligations facilitate settlements? The answers to these questions depend in part on precisely what such obligations actually require States and investors to do. This panel will, through a series of rapid response questions posed by the moderator, consider obligations to negotiate or consult across international legal fora, ranging from the International Court of Justice to investor-state arbitration.
    Panelist(s):
  • Callista Harris (Moderator)
  • Claudio Grossman (Speaker)
  • Amy Sander (Speaker)
  • Baiju Vasani (Speaker)
  • Bart Legum (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Fragmentation in International Data Protection Law

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    In July 2018, Facebook experienced the biggest one-day loss of value in U.S. stock market history, which the company attributed, in part, to concerns about its ability to protect user privacy. The European Union has guaranteed its citizens the right to personal data protection since the adoption of the European Data Protection Directive in 1995, which it later enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (2000) and most recently clarified in its May 2018 General Data Protection Regulation. In contrast to the EU's fundamental rights approach, the United States has approached the problem of data protection from various sector-specific consumer protection frameworks. These contrasting approaches to data protection have resulted in significant transatlantic trade tensions most recently resolved through the U.S.-EU 2016 Privacy Shield Agreement. While there may be a growing need for legal rules to protect the processing of personal data, differences in cultural and legal approaches may foreclose greater harmonization or internationalization of legal rules in this area. This panel will explore recent efforts to address the issue of data protection at the national and bilateral level, consider the cost of compliance with these conflicting regulations for U.S. companies, and examine whether any multilateral approach to privacy protection is realistically available.
    Panelist(s):
  • Dawn Yamane Hewett (Moderator)
  • Justin Antonipillai (Speaker)
  • Peter Swire (Speaker)
  • Geff Brown (Speaker)
  • Carolina Rossini (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Diverse Perspectives on the Impact of Colonialism in International Law

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Organized by the Minorities in International Law Interest Group.This session, which will be conducted in the form of a panel, will explore diverse perspectives on the impact and effect of colonialism, and the norms created thereunder, in modern international law. Our first speaker will explore theoretical approaches to the interrelationships between colonialism and international law norms. Other speakers will explore the effect of colonial norms on the development of the modern western notion of the rule of law; the colonial experience and its effect on disputes involving sovereignty (Chagos Archipelago dispute); the colonial experience and the development of and the development of commercial law in Africa; and the effect of the colonial experience on Latin American perceptions of development and international law.
    Panelist(s):
  • Olufunmilayo Arewa (Speaker)
  • Larry Catá Backer (Speaker)
  • Amb. Dr. Namira Negm (Speaker)
  • Joel Samuels (Speaker)
  • Adrien Wing (Moderator)
  • International Peace and Security

    Challenges and prospects for international peace and security: UN Peacekeeping, NATO, and the UDHR at 70

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    The end of World War II and the establishment of the United Nations ushered in a new international legal order for the maintenance of international peace and security based on a commitment to multilateralism, non-use of force, and the promotion of human rights. Three important developments emerged shortly thereafter. In 1948, the first U.N. peacekeeping operation was launched, and though such action was not expressly envisaged in the U.N. Charter, it became the dominant means for U.N. efforts to address peace and security. That same year, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), partially in recognition that the preservation of such rights made inter-state conflict less likely. And in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was created to counterbalance the Eastern bloc, creating stability through deterrence. These three pillars of the international security architecture now enter their eighth decade, but has the world changed since their establishment in ways that challenge their continued viability?. U.N. peacekeeping is under-resourced and has struggled to end conflict; a backlash against the idea of universality has placed international human rights under immense pressure; and NATO has arguably failed to deter a resurgent Russia. On the occasion of their 70th anniversary, this roundtable will explore how recent developments have affected these pillars, and in particular, assess whether any or all of them can make an ongoing contribution to peace and security through the "rules-based international order." Have they failed to deliver on their original promise or have they adapted effectively to contemporary global realities? Is their future dependent on the continuation of Western hegemony and unity? Can they adapt to the changing nature of security threats, rising powers and a waning commitment to multilateralism? Are they instruments for peace, security and the promotion of international law? What challenges and opportunities lie ahead?
    Panelist(s):
  • Michael Doyle (Speaker)
  • Diane Marie Amann (Moderator)
  • Steven Hill (Speaker)
  • Bruce Oswald (Speaker)
  • Rita Siemion (Speaker)
  • Coffee Break

    March 28 - 10:30 AM - 11:00 AM
    International Peace and Security

    San Francisco 2.0: Constructing a Global Governance Architecture for the 21st Century

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the International Organizations Interest Group.In 1945, world leaders gathered in San Francisco to sign the UN Charter, which laid the blueprint for the international system in place today. While it was well-suited for the post-World War II era, we now live in a world that is both multipolar and multiconceptual, in which nodes of power do not rest solely with States and the idea of global governance itself is being called into question.Rather than decrying the UN's shortcomings, let's be inventors. If the UN didn't exist, how would we construct it today? With experts from/on government, business, civil society, and international organizations, this simulation explores constitutional questions for a new global governance system. As a threshold matter, is a global governance organization needed? If so, who should be represented? How should it be structured? On the basis of these and other questions, the panel aims to draft a new "Charter" to address current challenges and to explore creative solutions to resolve them.
    Panelist(s):
  • Ian Johnstone (Moderator)
  • Lauren C. Baillie (Speaker)
  • Lisa L. Bhansali (Speaker)
  • Brian Bieron (Speaker)
  • Mohamed Helal (Speaker)
  • Tafadzwa Pasipanodya (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Regional Human Rights Bodies as Instruments of International Law: Contradictions and Fragmentation

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Regional human rights bodies function at the center of a paradox. On the one hand, their proximity to the societies they supervise allegedly contributes to their legitimacy and effectiveness. However, this very proximity encourages a regional-approach to universal values that can generate problems of fragmentation, where similar international legal issues receive different, even contradictory, treatment. This panel will focus on a series of topics and cases where regional human rights bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights have adopted widely divergent postures in interpreting similar provisions in their respective treaty instruments. These divergences include the areas of reparations, national security considerations, and the treatment of sexual orientation. The moderator will present a series of topics and cases where the jurisprudence of each human rights body might differ. Panelists will discuss reasons for the different approaches adopted by the regional human rights bodies and explore whether they constitute instances of fragmentation or promotion of underlying universal values.
    Panelist(s):
  • Christina Cerna (Moderator)
  • Elena Abrusci (Speaker)
  • Thomas Antkowiak (Speaker)
  • Silivia Serrano Guzmán (Speaker)
  • Professional and Academic Development

    Junior-Senior Scholars Pitch Session

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM
    (Fairchild West)

    The Society encourages junior academics, practitioners, and students interested in drafting scholarly works on international law topics to attend this workshop where members of the American Journal of International Law Board of Editors will be on hand to provide feedback and input on proposed ideas. Attendees are welcome to bring a short (no more than one paragraph) abstract, though this is not required.

    Signature Topic

    International Law as an Instrument to Regulate the Behavior of Non-state Actors in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    As more private actors enter ABNJs (private space companies, privately owned cruise vessels in the Arctic and off the coast of Antarctica, deep seabed miners, marine genetic material prospectors), conflicts between users, safety, and environmental damage become increasing concerns. This session will examine the behavior of non-state actors in ABNJs, the role of civil society non-state actors, and the governance role of states, including state responsibility for non-state actors, and the governance role of states. They may consider, for example, state responsibility for non-state actors; the relevance today of norms created at a time when states had the technical know-how (spacecraft, icebreakers) and incentives (science, security) to operate in ABNJs; private property interests and international community interests; and conflict management in BNJ. 

    This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Beyond National Jurisdiction: The Regulation of Human Activities in the Oceans, Polar Regions, Cyberspace and Outer Space.”

    Panelist(s):
  • David Balton (Speaker)
  • Marie Jacobsson (Speaker)
  • Chimène Keitner (Speaker)
  • Frans Von der Dunk (Speaker)
  • Lucinda Low (Moderator)
  • Dispute Resolution

    International Courts as a Counterweight to Power/Politics

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    International law has often been described as the great equalizer, giving States—big and small—an equal voice in international politics. But does international law actually constrain the exercise of power by militarily, politically, or economically stronger States? How well can international courts level the playing field? Under what conditions will they be most effective in this task? Today, there is a widespread sense that the rules-based international order is fraying, that more powerful States are increasingly using strength in international affairs, and that international institutions are less able to restrain actors that decide to work around or opt-out of the system. Revisiting in this new political context the theme of Professor Oscar Schachter's lecture at the 1999 ASIL Annual Meeting, "The Role of Power in International Law," this panel will explore the effectiveness of international law as a counterweight to power asymmetries. Some features of the international legal system actually are based on what Philip C. Jessup called "the inescapable fact of power differentials." But in most respects, international law is built upon the concept of sovereign equality. The panel will explore how less powerful States pursue ways to keep the playing field level, for instance, through the use of contentious cases or advisory opinions at international courts, through resolutions at international organizations, or by the development of new treaty regimes.
    Panelist(s):
  • Micheal Byers (Moderator)
  • Brian Egan (Speaker)
  • Victoria Hallum (Speaker)
  • Jan Paulsson (Speaker)
  • Danielle Yeow Ping Lin (Speaker)
  • International Peace and Security

    Emerging Technologies as a Source of Increased IHL Compliance and Enforcement

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Recent discussion concerning emerging technologies and armed conflict have focused almost exclusively on whether these technologies can comply with international humanitarian law (IHL). This is a vital discussion and should certainly continue. However, a useful parallel discussion would contemplate the ways in which emerging technologies could enhance compliance with IHL. Many such technologies may have the potential to provide commanders and other decision makers with increased ability to make key IHL determinations and to conduct hostilities in a way that is more IHL compliant. This panel will be a mixed panel and proceed in two phases. The first phase will be a standard rapid response panel where the moderator will present concise questions or scenarios to the panelists and give each a chance to respond briefly (2 to 3 minutes) on the topic of emerging technologies and how they can assist in IHL compliance. The focus of the panel would be a more general discussion of the capabilities of emerging technologies, though comments on specific technologies would also be welcome. Examples of emerging technologies that have already assisted IHL compliance would be very useful. Phase 1 of the panel will last for no more than 60 minutes. Phase 2 of the panel will center around poster presentations where the audience could then view poster exhibits set up in the same room that deal with specific technologies that might be used for enhanced IHL compliance. These posters might highlight specific technologies such as drones, sensors, webcams, robotics, various autonomous systems and even nanotechnology. These posters would be created by individuals who have responded to an ASIL "Call for Posters." The poster submissions will have been reviewed and selected for presentation in advance. Presenters would stand by their posters and answer questions as the audience members walked around the room, viewing the various posters. The goal would be to have around 15 posters.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tess Bridgeman (Speaker)
  • Rebecca Crootof (Speaker)
  • Andrea Harrison (Speaker)
  • Dick Jackson (Speaker)
  • Ahmed Ghappour (Moderator)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Economic Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The ASIL International Economic Law Interest Group business meeting will feature the presentation and expert critique of two unpublished papers by our Interest Group members that will be selected from a call for papers. The two unpublished papers for presentation will be selected and announced by Friday, March 1, 2019, and the two expert discussants will be identified and announced shortly thereafter.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Environmental Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Women in International Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The Women in International Law Interest Group business meeting will feature a roundtable discussion and presentation of three to four papers selected from interest group members on a variety of topics in international law.

    Break

    March 28 - 12:30 PM - 13:00 PM
    Receptions & Luncheons

    Hudson Medal Luncheon

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Sponsored by Foley & Hoag LLP.

    Tickets for this event must be purchased separately with registration.

    Panelist(s):
  • Justice Stephen Breyer (Honoree)
  • Jennifer Newstead (Distinguished Discussant)
  • Global Commons

    UNCLOS: a Tool for Peace and Stability?

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has been called a Constitution for the Sea. The panel will evaluate whether UNCLOS acts as a legal institution to promote order and peace on the sea either in its codified form or as Customary International Law. Is UNCLOS a tool to alleviate ocean disputes and protect the environment? Or, does it fail to fulfill this role and bring order to the ocean? This will be examined in light of maritime disputes and arbitrations. In particular, panelists will discuss the results of the South China Sea arbitration and whether it has assisted negotiations in the area, whether it has fruitfully clarified entitlements, or whether it has led to a de-legitimization of the system. The panel will also discuss jurisprudence in contentious and advisory cases that have implications for the environmental movement, and broader meaning for UNCLOS jurisdiction. The panel will evaluate whether UNCLOS is a tool to assist the global community on issues that call for a global response. UNCLOS protections for living resources will also be examined; as will conservation of the sea including alleviating pollution and rising sea levels.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tracy Roosevelt (Moderator)
  • Freya Baetens (Speaker)
  • Henry Bensurto Jr. (Speaker)
  • Alan Boyle (Speaker)
  • John Norton Moore (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    The Critical Contribution of Law towards Global Efforts to Mitigate Disaster Risk

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Disaster Law Interest Group.The scale and impact of disasters is rising exponentially, with insurance sector cost estimates for 'natural' disasters increasing from $188 billion (2016) to $300 billion (2017). In response, the global shift since the 1990s, reflected in the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (2015-2030), has been towards concentrating resources on disaster prevention and mitigation, including through improved preparedness and response mechanisms. The Sendai Framework establishes ambitious goals, exhorting the development of innovative approaches and dynamic cross-sectoral partnerships. Yet, to date, the legal community has largely not been fully integrated into existing efforts or collaborations, including with the scientific, technological or health sectors. This is partly attributable to commonly poor levels of understanding about the dynamic role of law as a tool of disaster risk mitigation, including developing DRR law. As this panel explores, there is a critical need for public/private stakeholders, whether national or international, to more actively draw upon and embed legal instruments (e.g. international human rights, environmental, disaster, health and maritime law) within their mechanisms and responses to reduce disaster risk and impacts: for instance, through improving consistency and coherence of standards, strengthening existing weak governance mechanisms, ensuring greater compliance and accountability, whilst better protecting vulnerable populations.
    Panelist(s):
  • Katja Samuel (Moderator)
  • Kirsten Bookmiller (Speaker)
  • Guilio Bartolini (Speaker)
  • Michael Cooper (Speaker)
  • Hugo Cahueñas-Muñoz (Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Federalism Strikes Back: Is the One-Voice Doctrine in Decline?

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    This panel will focus on the role of the several states and localities within the states, such as cities, in pursuing actions and relationships that shape foreign relations. For example, California, Massachusetts, and other states—on their own or through regional agreements—have enacted laws and regulations seeking to uphold targets and timetables consistent with climate change agreements. On the other side of the Atlantic, in the United Kingdom, sub-federal governments — such as Northern Ireland and Scotland, but also cities like London — have been playing an almost decisive role in the context of Brexit negotiations, holding separate negotiations with the European Union about a potential future relationship. Do these developments signal a new approach to foreign affairs and the end of the one-voice doctrine? The panel examines the current role of sub-federal entities in foreign affairs both within the US and the UK, as well as in cities across the globe.
    Panelist(s):
  • Marissa Jackson (Moderator)
  • David H. Moore (Speaker)
  • Janne E. Nijman (Speaker)
  • Dan Sarooshi (Speaker)
  • Shana Tabak (Speaker)
  • Michael J. Glennon (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Space Law IG

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    IG business meeting.
    Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    The Law (and Politics) of Displacement: Migratory & Refugee Crises under International Law

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Migration has been a pressing issue throughout 2018 and 2019, from family separation on the southern U.S. border to the ongoing refugee crises in Myanmar, Syria, and Venezuela. States have resorted to the language of international law to address complex questions related to these and other migratory emergencies, particularly with regard to refugee-related issues. How has international law helped them address or circumvent their responsibilities in these crises? What mechanisms have States established in order to comply with international law? What are the consequences of these law and policies on the ground? This panel will tackle three specific migratory crises: family separations at the Southern U.S. border, the Syrian refugee crisis, and the persecution of the Rohingya in Myanmar. The panelists will focus on the way in which States have invoked and established international law rules and institutions in each situation and the actions they have undertaken to comply with or avoid international legal obligations. Panelists will also discuss whether international law instruments such as the UN Global Compacts on Refugees and the Model International Mobility Convention can provide better solutions than the current international legal framework, or work with existing instruments to guide state action in the face of complex situations.
    Panelist(s):
  • Jill Goldenziel (Moderator)
  • Itamar Mann (Speaker)
  • Daniel P. Sullivan (Speaker)
  • Alice Farmer (Speaker)
  • Kristina Campbell (Speaker)
  • Coffee Break

    March 28 - 14:30 PM - 15:00 PM
    International Business

    The Remedial Function in International Economic Law

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the International Economic Law Interest Group.

    Remedies are a perennial problem in international trade and investment law. Much attention has been given to difficulties with the technical calculation of damages in the context of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), or disentangling the remedial possibilities under the World Trade Organization rules or under free trade agreements. These questions are interesting and important. But this session will not linger on this well-trodden ground. Instead, participants will explore, compare, and reassess the remedial standards in both fields from the perspective of function and policy. As a baseline, it is clear that trade remedies are designed to be prospective, while remedies in ISDS are retrospective and compensatory. But to what end? What are the functions of these very different approaches? What policy aims are they designed to pursue? And how effective are they? Beyond mere enforceability, are the remedial aspects of these regimes fulfilling their purported functions? What ancillary legal concepts remain underdeveloped? The session will explore and compare the nature, function, and goals of the remedial systems in trade and investment as designed. The speakers will then turn to how these systems have developed in practice. The panel will consider what kinds of remedies are actually available (such as damages, preliminary measures, specific performance, and countermeasures), and whether they should be interchangeable. The panel will also explore the appropriate and available standards of damages (fair market value, reliance, restitution, etc.), as well as ancillary remedial concepts that may be underdeveloped in international case law (e.g., causation, mitigation, the presumption against speculative damages, and the new business rule). The panel will then turn to how these remedial mechanisms work in practice. The speakers will examine how effective they are in view of their intended ends. The panel will also examine whether these systems have developed new or underappreciated functions in practice.

    Panelist(s):
  • Julian Arato (Moderator)
  • Christina Beharry (Speaker)
  • Donald McRae (Speaker)
  • Patrick Pearsall (Speaker)
  • Jan Yves Remy (Speaker )
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Senate v. President: A Moot Court on the President's Treaty Withdrawal Powers

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Recent skepticism of long-standing U.S. alliances and international institutions has reinvigorated the debate over the respective roles of the President and Congress in the withdrawal of the United States from treaties. One area where this issue has arisen concerns the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), where President Trump reportedly has suggested the possibility of a U.S. withdrawal, which in turn has triggered some calls in Congress for legislation that would preclude him from doing so. Using this as the backdrop, this session will take the form of a moot court to explore the extent of congressional vs. executive control over U.S. withdrawal from NATO. The session will address questions about the evolution of U.S. practice leading to the contemporary mainstream position asserting unilateral presidential withdrawal authority where a treaty itself contemplates withdrawal (as does the NATO treaty), what constitutional limits (if any) there are on that authority, and what may be learned from treaty withdrawal debates in other countries, including the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. The session will also look at the extent to which the Youngstown framework may support shared, as opposed to exclusive, authority over treaty withdrawal, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry.
    Panelist(s):
  • Scott Anderson (Moderator)
  • Ginger Anders (Counsel)
  • Chris Fonzone (Counsel)
  • Catherine Powell (Judge)
  • Donald Verrilli, Jr (Judge)
  • Curtis Bradley (Judge)
  • Signature Topic

    Preventing Violence and Atrocities through International Disarmament Law

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Organized by the Nonproliferation, Arms Control, and Disarmament Interest Group.

     In the past five years, two landmark disarmament treaties were adopted: the Arms Trade Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Both were the result of sustained advocacy by civil society to develop disarmament law and arms control policies that would be effective at preventing violence and atrocities. This panel will discuss how relevant international stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations, governments and the UN community, use disarmament law and policy to prevent daily violence and mass atrocities. Panelists will discuss the development of the Arms Trade Treaty, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, their contributions to international disarmament law, their potential and actual impacts, as well as their gaps and limitations. 

    This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Atrocity Prevention: The Role of International Law and Justice.”

    Panelist(s):
  • Rebecca Gerome (Moderator)
  • Yasmine Ahmed (Speaker)
  • John Burroughs (Speaker)
  • Jean Krasno (Speaker)
  • Pranay Vaddi (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Fourth Annual Detlev F. Vagts Roundtable on Transnational Law: Corporate Liability for Human Rights Violations after Jesner v. Arab Bank

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    This session made possible by a generous contribution from the Vagts Family. 

    In Jesner v. Arab Bank, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Alien Tort Statute could not be used to sue foreign corporations for human rights violations. This Roundtable will discuss possibilities for human rights suits against both U.S. and foreign corporations after Jesner. The paper will focus on European rules of jurisdiction and will outline the options for civil cases in Europe.The commentators will discuss the possibilities of U.S. and non-U.S. litigation from doctrinal, empirical, and litigation perspectives.

    Panelist(s):
  • William S. Dodge (Convener)
  • Lucas Roorda (Presenter)
  • Shayak Sarkar (Speaker)
  • Beth Stephens (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Dispute Resolution IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The first part of the meeting will consist of a roundtable discussion featuring Meg Kinnear, the Secretary General of ICSID, who will discuss the current ICSID rules amendment process and Colin Brown, Head of the EU Delegation to UNCITRAL Working Group III, who will talk about the European Union’s systemic ISDS reform aiming to establish a multilateral investment court. In addition, DRIG ISDS Reforms Working Group member Margie-Lys Jaime will talk about recent initiatives in Latin America to reform ISDS, highlighting some of the disagreements that may exist among Latin American countries on these initiatives.
    Professional and Academic Development

    BASIL Speed Mentoring Session

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Organized by the Blacks of the American Society of International Law Task Force. 

    The Blacks of the American Society of International Law Task Force (BASIL) will host a professional development event that will introduce law students and new legal professionals to experienced international practitioners. Attendees will participate in a 90 minute speed mentoring activity with mentors hosting a table where a small group of attendees can spend 10-12 minutes asking more personal, directed questions of the mentors. Participants will then be able to rotate to a new table, gaining the chance to learn about several different avenues of international employment.

    Panelist(s):
  • Douglas Cantwell (Mentor)
  • Rosa Celorio (Mentor)
  • Zoe Kugeares (Mentor)
  • Komala Ramachandra (Mentor)
  • Dorothy Patton (Mentor)
  • Victoria Shannon Sahani (Mentor)
  • Global Commons

    Deep Seabed Mining in Crowded Oceans

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 3)

    Twenty-five years after entry into force of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Seabed Authority (ISA)'s efforts to regulate deep seabed mining present a salient case study in the challenges facing international organizations with respect to common ocean spaces. Set up to administer what was once regarded as a relatively empty and remote terrain, the ISA must now contend with crowded oceans: crowded with multiple users laying claim to the same areas, with overlapping jurisdictional regimes, and with fundamentally different conceptions of what sharing the ocean commons should mean. These tensions are increasingly coming to a head in the drafting of the ISA's mining code. Here, the ISA must balance a regime that is attractive to investors with one which meets developing States' needs for equitable sharing of benefits. At the same time, it must respond to NGOs' demands for effective protection of the marine environment and accommodate the growing strategic and political importance which certain States attach to seabed mining operations and other uses in our ever-shrinking oceans, including shipping, fishing, and laying submarine cables. Does the ISA have the capacity to manage these competing legal, economic, and environmental imperatives? Through what means should it engage with parallel and competing regimes of ocean use? Whose concerns will our deep seabed mining regime vindicate?
    Panelist(s):
  • Kent Bressie (Speaker)
  • Tara Davenport (Speaker)
  • Kate Neilson (Speaker)
  • Daniel Rincon (Speaker)
  • Stephen E. Roady (Speaker)
  • Isabel Feichtner (Moderator)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Human Rights IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The Human Rights Interest Group invites AM attendees to its business meeting, which will host a reporting panel on "International Human Rights Law in Practice." IG members will discuss amicus brief practice in U.S. courts, petitions to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, submissions to the U.N. Human Rights Committee, and the U.N. Global Compact for Migration.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Refugee Law IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    Please join us for IRLIG’s Business Meeting which will feature a hot topics discussion sparked by short presentations from Co-Chairs Guy Goodwin-Gill and Kate Jastram and IRLIG Member Luis Campos. Luis will present on emerging architectures of resistance, with an update on U.S. asylum law and policy and the legal bar’s response; Kate will brief on international law issues in Matter of A-B-, Grace v. Whitaker, and Innovation Law Lab v. Nielsen (challenging the “Remain in Mexico” program); and Guy will provide perspective on international refugee law in the face of crisis and chaos. We will also be honoring the winner of the 5th Annual International Refugee Law Student Writing Competition.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Latin America IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild West)

    The Latin America Interest Group invites all AM attendees to its Business Meeting, which will feature an off the record round-table discussion on recent developments in Venezuela, focusing on the repercussions of the recognition by some countries and international institutions of the new interim government.
    Keynotes & Plenaries

    ASIL Assembly and Keynote: International Law as an Instrument: Dialogues, Tensions, Accomplishments

    March 28 - 17:00 PM - 18:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    The Assembly program will include the presentation of the Society’s annual honors and awards, remembrances of those we have lost during the past year, and the election and introduction of incoming officers and Executive Council members.

    Panelist(s):
  • Monica Pinto (Speaker)
  • Receptions & Luncheons

    Patrons’ Reception

    March 28 - 18:30 PM - 19:30 PM
    (Holmead)

    Sponsored by Debevoise & Plimpton LLP.  By invitation only.

    Receptions & Luncheons

    Gala Reception

    March 28 - 18:30 PM - 20:00 PM
    (Heights Courtyard)

    Receptions & Luncheons

    President’s Reception

    March 28 - 19:15 PM - 20:15 PM
    (Kalorama)

    Sponsored by the George Washington University Law School.

    Join Society President Sean D. Murphy for a dessert reception.

    Ancillary Events

    EISIL Authors Meet-Up

    March 29 - 07:00 AM - 08:00 AM
    (Boundary)

    Those interested in working on the EISIL database are welcome to join.

    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Legal Research IG

    March 29 - 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
    (Fairchild East)

    IG business meeting.

    Ancillary Events

    2019-2020 Executive Council Breakfast Meeting

    March 29 - 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
    (Holmead East)

    Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Late Breaking Panel: BREXIT and International Law

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Sponsored by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)

     The United Kingdom is scheduled to leave the European Union on Friday, March 29, 2019, having invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty two years prior, in 2017. Much is still unknown aboutthe UK’s impending exit, including whether an alternative agreement will be put in place, or whether the exit will take place as planned, on March 29, at all. But the plan to withdraw and the ongoing negotiations between the UK and the EU raise significant questions for both bodies, for their trading partners and allies, for corporate actors and investors, and for international law. This late-breaking panel will bring together experts from the UK, the EU, and others to discuss the international legal implications of Brexit and what role international law is likely to play in structuring, constraining, and enabling various political, economic, and cultural arrangements between actors both within and outside the UK.

    Panelist(s):
  • Oonagh Fitzgerald (Moderator)
  • Robert Howse (Speaker)
  • Jess Simonoff (Speaker)
  • Sir Michael Wood (Speaker)
  • João Rodrigues (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Legal Theory IG

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Cardozo)

    The International Legal Theory Interest Group business meeting will hold a roundtable presentation and discussion of papers presented by selected interest group members. The discussion will follow the theme of “New Perspectives in International Legal Theory,” and will feature presentations by the following scholars:

    • David Hughes, University of Michigan, “How States Persuade”
    • Karin Loevy, New York University, “AV Dicey, Humanitarianism, and the Legal Suffering ofRussian Jews” 
    • Valentina Vadi, Lancaster University, “Cultural Diversity in the Early Modern Law of Nations” 
    • Ka Lok Yip, Hong Kong University, “Reconceptualizing Norm Conflict in International Law”
    International Peace and Security

    Legal Techniques for Resolving Armed Conflicts with Non-State Actors

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    In an age when armed conflicts with non-state actors are increasing around the world, often with no clear end in sight, international law and institutions play a critical but often hidden role in resolving such conflicts. From international lawyers negotiating the terms of ceasefire agreements and peace treaties to international institutions facilitating transitional justice and economic stability, international law and institutions are important instruments for addressing today's conflicts. This rapid-response discussion will highlight the unique experience and expertise of a diverse set of players who use international law or institutions to resolve armed conflicts involving non-state actors in a diverse range of entities from ISIS to the FARC. Experts will address such questions as how does one begin negotiating a peace deal with a non-state actor? What role does international law play in such agreements? What security, economic, or political conditions are essential for ending these types of armed conflicts? Are international law and its related institutions effective instruments for facilitating an end to such conflicts or have they failed to adapt to today's conflicts?
    Panelist(s):
  • Randa Slim (Moderator)
  • Kristen Boon (Speaker)
  • Margaux Day (Speaker)
  • Gregory Fox (Speaker)
  • Vikram Raghavan (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Litigating Climate Change: New Legal Challenges

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Numerous lawsuits are being filed all over the world against a host of defendants, including multinational companies and governments, alleging that they are to blame for climate change that results in a violation of either national laws or international law. As examples: (a) nearly 900 Dutch citizens have filed a lawsuit in a district court in the Netherlands seeking that the court order the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions faster; (b) Greenpeace has appealed after an Oslo court rejected its argument that Norway's oil and gas exploration in the Arctic violates citizens' rights to a clean environment; (c) a Peruvian farmer who lives in Huarez, Peru, has brought a lawsuit against a German electricity producer alleging that it knowingly contributed to climate change by emitting greenhouse gases that bore some responsibility for the melting of mountain glaciers located near his hometown; and (d) a number of U.S. cities, such as New York, Oakland, and San Francisco, have filed climate change lawsuits against oil companies seeking to recover the cost of infrastructure needed to protect against rising sea levels. Additionally, the Permanent Court of Arbitration has advocated for the use of arbitration to resolve climate-change disputes, including disputes arising under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The panel will discuss these recent cases, as well as the success or failure of earlier litigation, with a view to understanding the role that international law will play in the climate change debate.
    Panelist(s):
  • Judith Levine (Moderator)
  • Kristin Casper (Speaker)
  • Michael Gerrard (Speaker)
  • Paula Henin (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Assessing Professional and Judicial Integrity in International Tribunals: Problems and Solution

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Anti-Corruption Law Interest GroupAlthough judges, arbitrators, and counsel in international tribunals face professional ethical dilemmas just like their domestic counterparts, the existing mechanisms in place to maintain professional integrity in international tribunals suffer from significant gaps. The lack of common and agreed upon ethical norms in international dispute resolution raises a variety of procedural and substantive concerns. Procedurally, it is unclear what ethics rules apply and how to resolve conflicts of interest. Substantively, the outcomes of some international court decisions concerning judges' or arbitrators' behaviors have been criticized on the basis of underlying conflicts. Ethical concerns are particularly important in investment arbitration and have prompted calls for reform of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system. The problems, however, are not limited to ISDS. This panel will address issues of professional ethics in international adjudication. Panelists will explore issues common to all international proceedings, from the perspective of both international judges and counselors and will seek to identify the deficiencies that should be addressed most urgently. These issues would include, among others, conflict of interest, attorney and judicial ethics, and the adequacy of existing codes of ethics.
    Panelist(s):
  • Jan Dunin-Wasowicz (Moderator)
  • Philip Nichols (Moderator)
  • John Crook (Speaker)
  • Chiara Giorgetti (Moderator)
  • Kate Parlett (Speaker)
  • Hélène Ruiz-Fabri (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Debate: Designing the Investor State Dispute Resolution System from Scratch

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    How would or should the investor-State dispute settlement system look if we had to start from scratch? This session will be an Oxford Union style debate with the resolution: "This house would design the investor-state dispute resolution system from scratch." Among other things, the debate will consider various system-design issues such as: (a) ad hoc versus standing body; (b) "double hatting" of arbitrators; (c) unilateral versus institutional appointments; (d) appellate review, and if so by whom. The debate will also consider whether the rules amendments of ICSID go far enough to address current controversies.
    Panelist(s):
  • Salim Moollan (Speaker)
  • Ina C. Popova (Speaker)
  • Jeffrey Sullivan (Speaker)
  • Gabrielle Kaufman-Kohler (Moderator)
  • Paul Tan (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    ASIL-Midwest IG

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Du Pont)

    ASIL Midwest invites all annual meeting attendees to its business meeting, which will feature a roundtable discussion on the unique challenges and opportunities related to teaching and practicing international law in the heartland. This discussion will be followed by presentations of recently published scholarship from IG members.

    Coffee Break

    March 29 - 10:30 AM - 11:00 AM
    Global Commons

    Climate Change as a Concern in Negotiating Mine Development Agreements

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Private International Law Interest GroupShould new mine development agreement include climate change mitigation as a consideration? The IBA's Model Mine Development Agreement addresses both environmental and social policies throughout the draft agreement. It does not, however, deal directly with climate change-related policies or with climate change-related mitigation efforts. This session will address how such issues might arise in the context of a mine development negotiation. The session will bring together four actors for a negotiation session at the beginning stages of negotiations of a mine development agreement – a host government representative, outside counsel for the international mining company, an NGO invited by the government particularly to address the concerns of indigenous peoples affected by the project and an academic participating as an expert with potential sway with a multilateral lending institution that could assist with funding for the project. The mock negotiations will focus on the broad concepts to be applied by the parties to address climate change mitigation in the mine development agreement. Following the mock negotiations, the players will step out of their roles to discuss the negotiation progress with the audience and highlight the conceptual challenges encountered by parties wishing to enter into a productive dialogue on climate change related questions of sustainable development and social licenses to operate.
    Panelist(s):
  • Diane Desierto (Speaker)
  • Teddy Baldwin (Speaker)
  • Tehtena Mebratu-Tsegaye (Speaker)
  • Poupak Bahamin (Speaker)
  • Frédéric Sourgens (Moderator)
  • Kabir Duggal (Moderator)
  • Dispute Resolution

    A State's Many Roles in International Adjudication

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    States have many different roles and interests in international adjudication, which may overlap and vary in importance from case to case. States' sovereignty endows them with a special character and responsibilities in international litigation. States are heterogeneous, comprised of various national and subnational entities, and are often encumbered by laws, national constituencies, or limited resources. States often view their interests and responsibilities as extending beyond any particular dispute, and their pleadings and submissions create state practice and opinio juris. This panel seeks to shed light on States' manifold roles and interests in international adjudication and to examine how governments and their advisers might reconcile and protect these roles and interests.
    Panelist(s):
  • Anna Joubin- Bret (Speaker)
  • Carolyn Lamm (Speaker)
  • Lionel Yee Woon Chin (Speaker)
  • Gabriel Bottini (Speaker)
  • Floriane Lavaud (Moderator)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Late Breaking Panel: Crisis in Venezuela

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Venezuela, until recently considered the richest country in South America, is in turmoil. The country has insufficient food and medicine for its people, has defaulted on billions of dollarsin debt obligations, is subject to crippling sanctions, and now faces a constitutional crisis with both Nicolás Maduro and Juan Guaidó claiming to be the rightful president of the Republic. The two rival governments are fighting for legitimacy in the eyes of their people and the international community, leading, among other things, to a crisis over the receipt of foreign aid and ownership over foreign state assets. The U.S., along with a growing number of other nations, has recognized Guaidó, the President of the National Assembly, as the interim President citing irregularities in the election process through which Maduro claimed the Presidency. On the other hand, others (both inside and outside Venezuela) still recognize Maduro’s authority. The current crisis raises new questions for governments, multinationals, aid agencies and counsel on their legal rights and obligations vis-à-vis Venezuela. This late-breaking panel will discuss the role of international law in this evolving crisis.
    Panelist(s):
  • Russ Dallen (Speaker)
  • Nicole Erb (Speaker)
  • Mary Ellen O'Connell (Speaker)
  • Alonso Gurmendi (Moderator)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    International Law and Interstellar Events: Who Speaks for Earth?

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    This session will examine what international law governs, or should govern, non-commercial State cooperation in space to address threats to global security. Through two hypotheticals, a panel of scientific experts and international and national security lawyers would examine the central question of who is empowered to make space-related decisions that could have profound effects on humankind. Hypothetical one is defensive – if a devastating asteroid is headed towards Earth, do capable states have individual or collective responsibilities to attempt to stop it? What bearing do arms control treaties have on the repurposing of anti-satellite weapons for the global defense? What is the Security Council's role under Chapter VII? If a state does attempt to intervene, may other states cite to Article VI and VII of the Outer Space Treaty or other sources of international law to hold it liable for any harm that results despite its efforts? Hypothetical two is affirmative – looking at previous efforts to reveal Earth and earthlings to sentient alien life forms, such as NASA's Voyager 1 and 2 Golden Records, and potential new attempts including Yuri Milner's Breakthrough Message competition. Does international law speak to whether one state, or a group of states, may broadcast Earth-identifying signals into space or to answer signals detected from an alien source? If it does not, what if any international legal rules or processes should be developed? What actors within a state should be able to speak for it – should government control such actions or are they fair game for private citizens?
    Panelist(s):
  • Shane Harris (Moderator)
  • Chris Borgen (Speaker)
  • Robin Frank (Speaker)
  • Andrea Harrington (Speaker)
  • Lindley Johnson (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Criminal Law IG

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The International Criminal Law Interest Group invites all AM attendees to its business meeting, which will consist of a roundtable discussion of current topics in international criminal law. The meeting will provide an opportunity for scholars and practitioners to present and discuss unpublished papers on relevant topics.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Lieber Society

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Cultural Heritage and the Arts IG

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    IG business meeting.
    International Business

    Anatomy of a Trade War

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Following the tit-for-tat unilateral tariff measures implemented by the Trump Administration and U.S. trading partners in 2018, the viability of the multilateral trading regime is in question. The primary objective of that regime has been to promote global economic welfare by increasing the productivity of capital, labor, and agriculture. However, as economic integration and international trade commitments have deepened, the multilateral trading regime has clashed with competing national policy priorities most recently advanced through unilateral trade remedies. Do these recent measures signal a rise in economic nationalism and the downfall of the multilateral trading system? Do unilateral trade measures have any place in a multilateral, rules-based trading system? What is the effect of unilateral trade measures targeting specific industries or regions on the way U.S. trade policy is made? This session seeks to address the impact of the burgeoning trade war on the U.S. heartland, where these tit-for-tat tariff measures are both intended to help and expected to hurt. While the trade war is a moving target, the policies on the table now will continue to raise serious questions about the appropriate balance between national trade remedies and international trade law whether one is watching from the WTO, Washington, or Wichita.
    Panelist(s):
  • Ron Kirk (Speaker)
  • Kevin Brosch (Speaker)
  • Angela Hoffman (Speaker)
  • Kathleen Claussen (Moderator)
  • Break

    March 29 - 12:30 PM - 13:00 PM
    Global Commons

    Innovation and Compromise in the Paris Agreement: A model for the future?

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    At the twenty-fourth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in December 2018, Parties adopted the so-called Paris “rulebook,” a set of key implementation guidelines called for in the Paris Agreement. Following this pivotal meeting, a roundtable of experts will discuss the innovative structural features of the Paris Agreement and its rulebook; highlight compromises necessary for achieving consensus; and identify key challenges for its implementation. Have the innovations and compromises succeeded in formulating an effective response to climate challenges? Does the structure of the Paris Agreement provide the best framework for addressing the collective action challenges of climate change? What is the role of non-state or sub-national actors in the implementation of the Agreement, and what lessons from Paris can be applied to cooperation across non-Parties? Is the traditional form of binding multilateral environmental agreements between states a thing of the past? And what can the Paris model teach us for tackling other collective action on environmental challenges confronting the world today?
    Panelist(s):
  • Dan Bodansky (Moderator)
  • Julie Cerqueira (Speaker)
  • Rueanna Haynes (Speaker)
  • Todd Stern (Speaker)
  • Christina Voigt (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Courts and Anti-Migrant Border Policy: The Transnational Litigation Landscape

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Migration Law Interest GroupThis session will examine how policies designed to restrict migration at the fault lines between the "global north" and the "global south" have been challenged through litigation initiatives. Looking at examples from the US, the European external borders, and the Australian-pacific region, speakers will comparatively examine migration or refugee bans for particular religious or ethnic groups, and the historical origins of such bans; family separations and their review by immigration tribunals, and the extent to which governments are cooperating transnationally to consolidate anti-migrant border governance regimes. Speakers will also reflect on the role of litigation and courts in political campaigns aiming to foster greater transnational movement and regional integration.
    Panelist(s):
  • Agnès Callamard (Speaker)
  • Violeta Moreno-Lax (Speaker)
  • Diala Shamas (Speaker)
  • Prof. JAYA Ramji-Nogales (Moderator)
  • Receptions & Luncheons

    Women in International Law Luncheon

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Sponsored by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)The Women in International Law Interest Group will present Tracy Robinson with the 2019 Prominent Woman in International Law Award.Honoree: Tracy Robinson, University of the West Indies Faculty of Law Tickets for this event must be purchased separately with registration.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tracy Robinson (Honoree)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Law and Technology IG

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    ILTechIG members will present and discuss ongoing writing, research and work projects in our area. One such presentation will be on net neutrality regulation policy; others may include prospects for US privacy legislation in light of the GDPR, the human rights impacts of trade in advanced technology, and the regulation of artificial intelligence.
    Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    International Disability Law and the Experience of Marginality

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Disability issues increasingly shape the content of international law, including intellectual property law, humanitarian law, criminal law, and immigration and refugee law. But are disability issues fully integrated into the agendas of international law and institutions? Does disability as a "rights marker" generate normative, theoretical, and empirical avenues to interrogate issues of intersectionality? And are international legal institutions effective instruments for addressing disability, which directly affects at least fifteen percent of people globally? This panel will engage cutting edge questions related to how international law and institutions address disability rights and whether they can do more. Panelists will speak to how international human rights law addresses or evades the interaction of multiple categories of difference or experiences of marginality; critically evaluate international-level efforts to integrate disability concerns; interrogate the ability of international human rights law to address issues of identity or marker intersectionality; and propose measures to strengthen international law to tackle disability concerns and rights intersectionality more broadly.
    Panelist(s):
  • Cora True- Frost (Moderator)
  • Jane Buchanan (Speaker)
  • Judith Heumann (Speaker)
  • Siobhán Mullally (Speaker)
  • Charlotte McClain- Nhlapo (Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Sovereign Immunity Revisited: Immunity of states and their officials for atrocities or terrorist act

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    This session would explore and assess key national and international developments in the law of sovereign immunity. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rubin v. Iran, barring the attachment of Iranian antiquities located in the U.S. to execute judgments against Iran issued under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). Furthermore, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorist Act (JASTA) was enacted in 2016, essentially broadening the terrorism exception to FSIA. Also in 2016, the Supreme Court decided Bank Markazi v. Peterson, in which it sanctioned the turnover of about $1.75 billion in Central Bank of Iran assets to families of victims of terrorism. Subsequently, Iran brought a case against the United States at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Finally, [the African Union has successfully spearheaded efforts [are currently underway] at the United Nations to secure an ICJ advisory opinion on the immunity of heads of state and other senior officials, against the backdrop of attempts to prosecute Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir at the International Criminal Court. These developments highlight the tension between immunity and impunity when it comes to states and leaders engaged in terrorism or grave human rights violations. The panel will consider how recent U.S. cases and legislation have addressed this tension, and whether they are consistent with the international law on immunity. Questions will be posed by the moderator for rapid response by speakers addressing whether such immunity ought to be qualified in cases involving terrorism or grave human rights violations, and what, if any, other legal tools are available for addressing impunity in such cases.
    Panelist(s):
  • Chimène Keitner (Moderator)
  • John Bellinger (Speaker)
  • Marko Milanovic (Speaker)
  • Angela Mudukuti (Speaker)
  • Coffee Break

    March 29 - 14:30 PM - 15:00 PM
    Signature Topic

    Tabletop Simulation: Atrocity Prevention Decision-Making in the U.S. Government

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    This event will explore the interplay of law and diplomacy through a tabletop simulation showing how the U.S. interagency might respond to an unfolding mass atrocity. Rather than a traditional panel of presenters, the participants – all of whom were actively involved in these issues while in government -- will assume roles of Executive branch participants (State, DOD, Justice, Treasury, USAID, intelligence community, NSC) as the moderator presents the participants with information and reports about an emerging crisis. Participants would highlight the various atrocity prevention and response tools from which different entities can draw, identify domestic and international legal constraints, and explain other issues that affect their ability to respond effectively. Over the course of the session, the participants would canvass the different atrocity prevention responses available (diplomacy, sanctions, various forms of intervention within the framework of R2P or otherwise, and accountability mechanisms), explore how these tools can reinforce or conflict with each other, and reenact how the U.S. government interfaces with its allies and potential spoilers who will also be reacting to the situation.This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Atrocity Prevention: The Role of International Law and Justice.”
    Panelist(s):
  • Anna Cave (Moderator)
  • Brian Egan (Speaker)
  • Victoria Holt (Speaker)
  • Sarah Mendelson (Speaker)
  • Clint Williamson (Speaker)
  • Linda Thomas-Greenfield (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    The American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016: An Advance or Retreat for Indigenous Peoples' Rights?

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Organized by the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Interest GroupThe American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (ADRIP) was adopted by the Organization of American States (OAS) on June 15, 2016, after 17 years of negotiations. The Declaration is the first international instrument on Indigenous peoples' rights to have been adopted since the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It is a major contribution to standard–setting on Indigenous peoples' rights in international law and is likely to be brought to bear on the practices of OAS members through the jurisprudence of the Inter-American system of human rights. The ADRIP extends the corpus of international human rights law by including protections not found elsewhere This event proposes to discuss the significance of the ADRIP and critically consider the uses that might be made of it as an instrument to further Indigenous peoples aspirations in the Americas and globally.
    Panelist(s):
  • Kirsty Gover (Moderator)
  • Brenda Gunn (Speaker)
  • June L. Lorenzo (Speaker)
  • Professional and Academic Development

    New Voices: Tuning the Instrument: Assessing and developing international law

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    For over a decade, the Society has reserved a session during each Annual Meeting to feature up- and-coming voices in the international law community. These presentations were selected from nearly 100 submissions and represent interesting perspectives, new ideas, and fresh takes on a wide variety of international law issues.
    Panelist(s):
  • Michael Allen (Speaker)
  • Ivana Jordanovska (Speaker)
  • Gor Samvel (Speaker)
  • Jason Rudall (Speaker)
  • Marike Paulsson (Moderator)
  • Dispute Resolution

    The 7th Annual Charles N. Brower Lecture: A Century of Dispute Settlement through International Law (1919-2019): The role of multilateralism

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    The Seventh Annual Charles N. Brower Lecture on International Dispute Resolution will be presented at the 2019 ASIL Annual Meeting by Judge Peter Tomka of the International Court of Justice. Judge Tomka served in the Foreign Ministry of Czechoslovakia and Slovakia and later as Slovakia’s Ambassador to the United Nations. He served as a member of the United Nations International Law Commission before being elected to the International Court of Justice in 2003. Judge Tomka previously served as President of the International Court of Justice. He is the honorary president of the Slovak Society of International Law. The Brower lecture is named in honor of Judge Charles N. Brower for his many contributions to the field of international law.
    Panelist(s):
  • Peter Tomka (Distinguished Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Government Attorneys IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The Government Attorneys Interest Group invites AM attendees to its Business Meeting, which will focus on the topic "International Trade at a Crossroads." The discussion will feature a presentation from Kathleen Claussen, Associate Professor at the University of Miami School of Law and a veteran of the Office of the United States Trade Representative, who will lead a conversation on the future of international trade agreements as a tool of U.S. Government policy.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Courts and Tribunals IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Law in Domestic Courts IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    The International Law in Domestic Courts (ILDC) interest group will devote its business meeting to the work of two emerging scholars within its membership. Elena Chachko will present a work-in-progress currently titled Administrative Foreign and Security Policy. Farshad Ghodoosi will present a work-in-progress currently titled Fall of Last Safeguard in Global Dejudicialization. The session will be structured to allow ample opportunity for audience participation.
    Global Commons

    The Last Drop: Practical Tools for Addressing Transboundary Water Crises

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Global water crises are recognized as one of the biggest threats facing the planet, raising concerns about scarcity, environmental impact, and the potential for violent conflict. With more than 270 rivers and 600 aquifers crossing an international boundary, international cooperation is an essential condition for the optimal management and utilization of freshwater resources. Yet, as consumption continues to increase, to what extent are current mechanisms for the governance of transboundary water resources adequate to face the challenges posed by population growth, geo-politics, climate change, extreme weather events, and political instability? This panel, consisting of experts from different regions and institutions, will examine this question by focusing on a few current, real-world case studies. The panel will discuss how existing governance frameworks are faring under crisis and whether – drawing from other transboundary freshwater management mechanisms across the world – there might be other practical tools or best practices that could be applied to help mitigate the situation.
    Panelist(s):
  • Stephen McCaffrey (Moderator)
  • Susan Daniel (Speaker)
  • Chrisitna Leb (Speaker)
  • Hannah Lobel (Speaker)
  • Makane Mbengue (Speaker)
  • Keynotes & Plenaries

    Kenyote Address: A Tribute to Robert H Jackson: Recalling America’s contribution to international criminal justice

    March 29 - 17:00 PM - 18:00 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Panelist(s):
  • Chile Eboe-Osuji (Speaker)
  • Receptions & Luncheons

    Members’ Reception

    March 29 - 18:00 PM - 19:30 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Receptions & Luncheons

    L Alumni Reception

    March 29 - 18:30 PM - 19:30 PM
    (Kalorama)

    Sponsored by Arnold & Porter LLPBy Invitation Only
    Receptions & Luncheons

    New Professionals Reception

    March 29 - 18:30 PM - 19:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    Film Screening: Prosecuting Evil

    March 29 - 19:45 PM - 21:45 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Director Barry Avrich’s gripping new documentary tells the fascinating story of Ben Ferencz—the last surviving Nuremberg prosecutor and lifelong advocate of “law not war.” After witnessing Nazi concentration camps shortly after liberation, Ferencz became the lead prosecutor in the Einsatzgruppen case at Nuremberg, which has been called the biggest murder trial in history. All 22 Nazi officials tried for murdering over a million Jews were convicted. Ferencz went on to advocate for restitution for Jewish victims of the Holocaust and later for the establishment of the International Criminal Court. A longtime member and patron of ASIL, his fight for justice for victims of atrocity crimes continues today.

    Panelist(s):
  • Ben Ferencz (Distinguished Guest )
  • Barry Avrich (Director and Producer)
  • Ancillary Events

    Interest Group Co-Chair Breakfast

    March 30 - 07:30 AM - 09:00 AM
    (Holmead East)

    Sponsored by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) By invitation only
    International Peace and Security

    Theft in War: Using International Law to Rein in Pillage of Natural Resources

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    The prohibition on pillage (theft) during war is a fundamental rule of international humanitarian law (IHL). When thinking about pillage, we usually envision invading armies storming villages for spoils of war. Yet, contemporary wars, and particularly natural resource wars, present complex questions on the scope and potential of the prohibition of pillage. While a belligerent may use natural resources of an occupied territory for the needs of the occupied population and to sustain its own forces, when does such use cross the line so as to constitute pillage? For instance, can pillage include granting concessions to corporations in conflict areas? Likewise, can land use by an occupying power amount, under some circumstances, to pillage? In recent years, the prohibition on pillage is increasingly used to address the growing problem of illegal exploitation of natural resources. The examples are numerous: the International Court of Justice found Uganda responsible for pillage of Congolese natural resources more than a decade ago. Since then, the Canadian and Dutch governments sponsored a major international conference at on pillage of natural resources; Swiss authorities began a formal criminal investigation against one of the leading gold refineries in the world; and Belgian authorities arrested a businessman for allegedly pillaging "blood diamonds" from Sierra Leone. Significantly, in recent months, the International Criminal Court announced a new prosecutorial policy that would give particular consideration to illegal exploitation of natural resources. Finally, the U.S. State Department created a new $2 million project to focus on training Congolese prosecutors on how to pursue these cases. Clearly, the legal fight against pillage is of growing importance in international law. What are the advantages and shortcoming of this development?
    Panelist(s):
  • Montse Ferrer (Moderator)
  • Ioannis Kalpouzos (Speaker)
  • Nico Schrijver (Speaker)
  • James Stewart (Speaker)
  • Professional and Academic Development

    International Law Review Editors Roundtable

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Cardozo)

    In recognition of the important role that student-edited international law journals play in the dissemination of international legal scholarship, this year the Society is inaugurating a new program as part of the Annual Meeting, the International Law Review Editor Roundtable. This Roundtable will discuss key issues around legal scholarship, including: selecting great topics that might be more relevant to the various audiences of law journals, including scholars and practitioners; how international law journals can be more effective at soliciting and/or selecting relevant pieces of international legal scholarship; and how to work with authors (who mayhave different cultural perspectives) to successfully publish their pieces. The Roundtable willbe facilitated by international law experts as well as sitting editors-in-chief of law student-run international law journals. The Society invites current students and recent graduates interested in the process of scholarship and publication in international law to connect with their peers and distinguished scholars and practitioners.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tom Ginsburg (Speaker)
  • Katerina Linos (Speaker)
  • Makane Mbengue (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Emerging Accountability Mechanisms: Innovative or Ineffective?

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Mechanisms of accountability for serious human rights violations and war crimes have taken a wide variety of shapes and forms, with international and hybrid criminal tribunals as the most visible model, followed by prosecutions in national courts. More recently, particularly when the use of such courts or tribunals has not been possible, alternative accountability mechanisms have emerged, from investigative institutions to transitional justice mechanisms. In Syria, the UN General Assembly created an International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) to assist in the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for the most serious crimes during the Syrian Civil War. As the IIIM itself states, it is neither a prosecutor's office nor a court, but a collector and analyzer of information and evidence looking to assist future criminal proceedings, whether those occur in an international tribunal or national court. Will this be an effective way to promote accountability? In Colombia, the recent Peace Agreement with the FARC armed group created the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP), which resembles a traditional hybrid court, but is conceived of as a unique transitional justice mechanism geared towards reconciliation rather than punishment. The Agreement garnered criticism from human rights groups as a source for potential impunity for war criminals. Can this non-retributive form of justice appropriately promote accountability? How will this process work in parallel with the ICC preliminary examination proceedings for Colombia? This panel will explore the evolution, current status, and future of these "non-traditional" accountability mechanisms: the IIIM in Syria and the SJP in Colombia. Panelists will respond to a series of questions posed by the moderator addressing the challenges these mechanisms face and their potential to act as international law instruments in the fight against impunity.
    Panelist(s):
  • Mohammad al Abdallah (Speaker)
  • Alexandra Huneeus (Speaker)
  • Michelle Jarvis (Speaker)
  • Juan Pappier (Speaker)
  • Saira Mohamed (Moderator)
  • Ancillary Events

    BASIL Task Force Meeting

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Fairchild West)

    International Business

    Asia’s Response to the US Indo-Pacific Strategy

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    In 2018, the Trump Administration declared the "Free and Open Indo-Pacific" strategy as the new U.S. policy on Asia. The new Indo-Pacific strategy is expected to have far-reaching implications for U.S.-Asia relations. This roundtable will explore some of those issues, in particular, the impact of mega-free trade agreements and South China Sea disputes on international trade. Participants will discuss the extent to which international law facilitates or hinders US trade goals; the legal and political responses to U.S. policy available to nations in the Asia-Pacific Region; how recent diplomatic developments in China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) might serve as a counter-balance towards perceived U.S. unilateralism; and whether alternative strategies, such as the CPTPP, the RCEP and the Belt and Road Initiative, might shape international law and commercial transactions.
    Panelist(s):
  • Weixia Gu (Moderator)
  • Pasha Hsieh (Moderator)
  • Ronald Eberhard Tundang (Speaker)
  • Matthew Erie (Speaker)
  • Julian Ku (Speaker)
  • Inu Manak (Speaker)
  • International Business

    The European Commission and International Investment Arbitration: innovator, disruptor, spoiler?

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    The European Commission recently emerged as a dominant actor in international investment arbitration, shaping the reform agenda, urging a new dispute-resolution system, intervening in investment disputes, and requiring Member States both to terminate intra-EU investment treaties and decline to pay arbitral awards arising from them. In Achmea v. Slovak Republic, the Court of Justice of the European Union endorsed the Commission's view that EU law precludes application of an ISDS clause in a bilateral investment treaty between two Member States. Does the court's reasoning extend to all Member State investment treaties, or even to agreements to which the EU itself is a party, such as the Energy Charter Treaty? What are the implications of these developments for States, investors, and interested third parties?
    Panelist(s):
  • George Bermann (Moderator)
  • Andrea Bjorklund (Speaker)
  • Markus Burgstaller (Speaker)
  • Caroline Richard (Speaker)
  • Coffee Break

    March 30 - 10:30 AM - 11:00 AM
    International Business

    Closing Plenary: International Law as an Instrument for Development

    March 30 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Co-sponsored by the Municipality of The Hague and Asser Institute for International and European LawInternational law has long been used as an instrument for economic development. Indeed, international rules and institutions have promoted trade and investment across borders, developed traditional and innovative techniques for monitoring implementation and resolving disputes, and helped harmonize development-related rules with other fields of international law, including human rights law and international environmental law. The 2015 UN Sustainable Development Goals set an optimistic agenda for using international law as a tool for accomplishing economic and human development in a sustainable manner between now and 2030. At the same time, studies indicate that while international programs of economic development have improved conditions for the worst off globally, nevertheless global economic inequality remains on the rise. Further, global competition, trends towards protectionism, and rapidly changing technology, all offer significant challenges to the use of international law to promote economic development, with natural disasters and climate change raising the spectre of long-term risk to economic growth, especially in developing nations. As such, leading figures question the efficacy of the use of international law and institutions to promote economic development. The closing plenary of the 2019 ASIL Annual meeting will bring together leading diplomats, practitioners, and academics to consider the past, present and future use of international law as an instrument for economic and human development. What has worked? What has not worked? What changes are needed for the future?
    Panelist(s):
  • Janne E. Nijman (Moderator)
  • Ulrik Vestergaard Knudson (Speaker)
  • Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Speaker)
  • Martijin Snoep (Speaker)
  • Receptions & Luncheons

    Closing Luncheon Reception

    March 30 - 12:30 PM - 13:30 PM
    (International Terrace)

    Sponsored by the Embassy of the Netherlands in Washington and the Municipality of the Hague

    Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Diverse Perspectives on the Impact of Colonialism in International Law

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Organized by the Minorities in International Law Interest Group.This session, which will be conducted in the form of a panel, will explore diverse perspectives on the impact and effect of colonialism, and the norms created thereunder, in modern international law. Our first speaker will explore theoretical approaches to the interrelationships between colonialism and international law norms. Other speakers will explore the effect of colonial norms on the development of the modern western notion of the rule of law; the colonial experience and its effect on disputes involving sovereignty (Chagos Archipelago dispute); the colonial experience and the development of and the development of commercial law in Africa; and the effect of the colonial experience on Latin American perceptions of development and international law.
    Panelist(s):
  • Olufunmilayo Arewa (Speaker)
  • Larry Catá Backer (Speaker)
  • Amb. Dr. Namira Negm (Speaker)
  • Joel Samuels (Speaker)
  • Adrien Wing (Moderator)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Regional Human Rights Bodies as Instruments of International Law: Contradictions and Fragmentation

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Regional human rights bodies function at the center of a paradox. On the one hand, their proximity to the societies they supervise allegedly contributes to their legitimacy and effectiveness. However, this very proximity encourages a regional-approach to universal values that can generate problems of fragmentation, where similar international legal issues receive different, even contradictory, treatment. This panel will focus on a series of topics and cases where regional human rights bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights have adopted widely divergent postures in interpreting similar provisions in their respective treaty instruments. These divergences include the areas of reparations, national security considerations, and the treatment of sexual orientation. The moderator will present a series of topics and cases where the jurisprudence of each human rights body might differ. Panelists will discuss reasons for the different approaches adopted by the regional human rights bodies and explore whether they constitute instances of fragmentation or promotion of underlying universal values.
    Panelist(s):
  • Christina Cerna (Moderator)
  • Elena Abrusci (Speaker)
  • Thomas Antkowiak (Speaker)
  • Silivia Serrano Guzmán (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    The Law (and Politics) of Displacement: Migratory & Refugee Crises under International Law

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Migration has been a pressing issue throughout 2018 and 2019, from family separation on the southern U.S. border to the ongoing refugee crises in Myanmar, Syria, and Venezuela. States have resorted to the language of international law to address complex questions related to these and other migratory emergencies, particularly with regard to refugee-related issues. How has international law helped them address or circumvent their responsibilities in these crises? What mechanisms have States established in order to comply with international law? What are the consequences of these law and policies on the ground? This panel will tackle three specific migratory crises: family separations at the Southern U.S. border, the Syrian refugee crisis, and the persecution of the Rohingya in Myanmar. The panelists will focus on the way in which States have invoked and established international law rules and institutions in each situation and the actions they have undertaken to comply with or avoid international legal obligations. Panelists will also discuss whether international law instruments such as the UN Global Compacts on Refugees and the Model International Mobility Convention can provide better solutions than the current international legal framework, or work with existing instruments to guide state action in the face of complex situations.
    Panelist(s):
  • Jill Goldenziel (Moderator)
  • Itamar Mann (Speaker)
  • Daniel P. Sullivan (Speaker)
  • Alice Farmer (Speaker)
  • Kristina Campbell (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Courts and Anti-Migrant Border Policy: The Transnational Litigation Landscape

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Migration Law Interest GroupThis session will examine how policies designed to restrict migration at the fault lines between the "global north" and the "global south" have been challenged through litigation initiatives. Looking at examples from the US, the European external borders, and the Australian-pacific region, speakers will comparatively examine migration or refugee bans for particular religious or ethnic groups, and the historical origins of such bans; family separations and their review by immigration tribunals, and the extent to which governments are cooperating transnationally to consolidate anti-migrant border governance regimes. Speakers will also reflect on the role of litigation and courts in political campaigns aiming to foster greater transnational movement and regional integration.
    Panelist(s):
  • Agnès Callamard (Speaker)
  • Violeta Moreno-Lax (Speaker)
  • Diala Shamas (Speaker)
  • Prof. JAYA Ramji-Nogales (Moderator)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    International Disability Law and the Experience of Marginality

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Disability issues increasingly shape the content of international law, including intellectual property law, humanitarian law, criminal law, and immigration and refugee law. But are disability issues fully integrated into the agendas of international law and institutions? Does disability as a "rights marker" generate normative, theoretical, and empirical avenues to interrogate issues of intersectionality? And are international legal institutions effective instruments for addressing disability, which directly affects at least fifteen percent of people globally? This panel will engage cutting edge questions related to how international law and institutions address disability rights and whether they can do more. Panelists will speak to how international human rights law addresses or evades the interaction of multiple categories of difference or experiences of marginality; critically evaluate international-level efforts to integrate disability concerns; interrogate the ability of international human rights law to address issues of identity or marker intersectionality; and propose measures to strengthen international law to tackle disability concerns and rights intersectionality more broadly.
    Panelist(s):
  • Cora True- Frost (Moderator)
  • Jane Buchanan (Speaker)
  • Judith Heumann (Speaker)
  • Siobhán Mullally (Speaker)
  • Charlotte McClain- Nhlapo (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    The American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016: An Advance or Retreat for Indigenous Peoples' Rights?

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Organized by the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Interest GroupThe American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (ADRIP) was adopted by the Organization of American States (OAS) on June 15, 2016, after 17 years of negotiations. The Declaration is the first international instrument on Indigenous peoples' rights to have been adopted since the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It is a major contribution to standard–setting on Indigenous peoples' rights in international law and is likely to be brought to bear on the practices of OAS members through the jurisprudence of the Inter-American system of human rights. The ADRIP extends the corpus of international human rights law by including protections not found elsewhere This event proposes to discuss the significance of the ADRIP and critically consider the uses that might be made of it as an instrument to further Indigenous peoples aspirations in the Americas and globally.
    Panelist(s):
  • Kirsty Gover (Moderator)
  • Brenda Gunn (Speaker)
  • June L. Lorenzo (Speaker)
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration

    Emerging Accountability Mechanisms: Innovative or Ineffective?

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Mechanisms of accountability for serious human rights violations and war crimes have taken a wide variety of shapes and forms, with international and hybrid criminal tribunals as the most visible model, followed by prosecutions in national courts. More recently, particularly when the use of such courts or tribunals has not been possible, alternative accountability mechanisms have emerged, from investigative institutions to transitional justice mechanisms. In Syria, the UN General Assembly created an International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) to assist in the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for the most serious crimes during the Syrian Civil War. As the IIIM itself states, it is neither a prosecutor's office nor a court, but a collector and analyzer of information and evidence looking to assist future criminal proceedings, whether those occur in an international tribunal or national court. Will this be an effective way to promote accountability? In Colombia, the recent Peace Agreement with the FARC armed group created the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP), which resembles a traditional hybrid court, but is conceived of as a unique transitional justice mechanism geared towards reconciliation rather than punishment. The Agreement garnered criticism from human rights groups as a source for potential impunity for war criminals. Can this non-retributive form of justice appropriately promote accountability? How will this process work in parallel with the ICC preliminary examination proceedings for Colombia? This panel will explore the evolution, current status, and future of these "non-traditional" accountability mechanisms: the IIIM in Syria and the SJP in Colombia. Panelists will respond to a series of questions posed by the moderator addressing the challenges these mechanisms face and their potential to act as international law instruments in the fight against impunity.
    Panelist(s):
  • Mohammad al Abdallah (Speaker)
  • Alexandra Huneeus (Speaker)
  • Michelle Jarvis (Speaker)
  • Juan Pappier (Speaker)
  • Saira Mohamed (Moderator)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Obligations to Negotiate and Consult: Worthwhile tool or exercise in futility?

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Are obligations to negotiate or consult a tool of international law which States have at their disposal for helping to resolve their problems? Does the claim of an obligation to negotiate or consult bring States to the negotiating table or does it have the opposite effect? In the same vein, most investment treaties include a clause that encourages or obliges the parties involved in a dispute to engage in consultations and negotiations. In practice, however, is there any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that these obligations facilitate settlements? The answers to these questions depend in part on precisely what such obligations actually require States and investors to do. This panel will, through a series of rapid response questions posed by the moderator, consider obligations to negotiate or consult across international legal fora, ranging from the International Court of Justice to investor-state arbitration.
    Panelist(s):
  • Callista Harris (Moderator)
  • Claudio Grossman (Speaker)
  • Amy Sander (Speaker)
  • Baiju Vasani (Speaker)
  • Bart Legum (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    International Courts as a Counterweight to Power/Politics

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    International law has often been described as the great equalizer, giving States—big and small—an equal voice in international politics. But does international law actually constrain the exercise of power by militarily, politically, or economically stronger States? How well can international courts level the playing field? Under what conditions will they be most effective in this task? Today, there is a widespread sense that the rules-based international order is fraying, that more powerful States are increasingly using strength in international affairs, and that international institutions are less able to restrain actors that decide to work around or opt-out of the system. Revisiting in this new political context the theme of Professor Oscar Schachter's lecture at the 1999 ASIL Annual Meeting, "The Role of Power in International Law," this panel will explore the effectiveness of international law as a counterweight to power asymmetries. Some features of the international legal system actually are based on what Philip C. Jessup called "the inescapable fact of power differentials." But in most respects, international law is built upon the concept of sovereign equality. The panel will explore how less powerful States pursue ways to keep the playing field level, for instance, through the use of contentious cases or advisory opinions at international courts, through resolutions at international organizations, or by the development of new treaty regimes.
    Panelist(s):
  • Micheal Byers (Moderator)
  • Brian Egan (Speaker)
  • Victoria Hallum (Speaker)
  • Jan Paulsson (Speaker)
  • Danielle Yeow Ping Lin (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Assessing Professional and Judicial Integrity in International Tribunals: Problems and Solution

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Anti-Corruption Law Interest GroupAlthough judges, arbitrators, and counsel in international tribunals face professional ethical dilemmas just like their domestic counterparts, the existing mechanisms in place to maintain professional integrity in international tribunals suffer from significant gaps. The lack of common and agreed upon ethical norms in international dispute resolution raises a variety of procedural and substantive concerns. Procedurally, it is unclear what ethics rules apply and how to resolve conflicts of interest. Substantively, the outcomes of some international court decisions concerning judges' or arbitrators' behaviors have been criticized on the basis of underlying conflicts. Ethical concerns are particularly important in investment arbitration and have prompted calls for reform of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system. The problems, however, are not limited to ISDS. This panel will address issues of professional ethics in international adjudication. Panelists will explore issues common to all international proceedings, from the perspective of both international judges and counselors and will seek to identify the deficiencies that should be addressed most urgently. These issues would include, among others, conflict of interest, attorney and judicial ethics, and the adequacy of existing codes of ethics.
    Panelist(s):
  • Jan Dunin-Wasowicz (Moderator)
  • Philip Nichols (Moderator)
  • John Crook (Speaker)
  • Chiara Giorgetti (Moderator)
  • Kate Parlett (Speaker)
  • Hélène Ruiz-Fabri (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    Debate: Designing the Investor State Dispute Resolution System from Scratch

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    How would or should the investor-State dispute settlement system look if we had to start from scratch? This session will be an Oxford Union style debate with the resolution: "This house would design the investor-state dispute resolution system from scratch." Among other things, the debate will consider various system-design issues such as: (a) ad hoc versus standing body; (b) "double hatting" of arbitrators; (c) unilateral versus institutional appointments; (d) appellate review, and if so by whom. The debate will also consider whether the rules amendments of ICSID go far enough to address current controversies.
    Panelist(s):
  • Salim Moollan (Speaker)
  • Ina C. Popova (Speaker)
  • Jeffrey Sullivan (Speaker)
  • Gabrielle Kaufman-Kohler (Moderator)
  • Paul Tan (Speaker)
  • Dispute Resolution

    A State's Many Roles in International Adjudication

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    States have many different roles and interests in international adjudication, which may overlap and vary in importance from case to case. States' sovereignty endows them with a special character and responsibilities in international litigation. States are heterogeneous, comprised of various national and subnational entities, and are often encumbered by laws, national constituencies, or limited resources. States often view their interests and responsibilities as extending beyond any particular dispute, and their pleadings and submissions create state practice and opinio juris. This panel seeks to shed light on States' manifold roles and interests in international adjudication and to examine how governments and their advisers might reconcile and protect these roles and interests.
    Panelist(s):
  • Anna Joubin- Bret (Speaker)
  • Carolyn Lamm (Speaker)
  • Lionel Yee Woon Chin (Speaker)
  • Gabriel Bottini (Speaker)
  • Floriane Lavaud (Moderator)
  • Dispute Resolution

    The 7th Annual Charles N. Brower Lecture: A Century of Dispute Settlement through International Law (1919-2019): The role of multilateralism

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    The Seventh Annual Charles N. Brower Lecture on International Dispute Resolution will be presented at the 2019 ASIL Annual Meeting by Judge Peter Tomka of the International Court of Justice. Judge Tomka served in the Foreign Ministry of Czechoslovakia and Slovakia and later as Slovakia’s Ambassador to the United Nations. He served as a member of the United Nations International Law Commission before being elected to the International Court of Justice in 2003. Judge Tomka previously served as President of the International Court of Justice. He is the honorary president of the Slovak Society of International Law. The Brower lecture is named in honor of Judge Charles N. Brower for his many contributions to the field of international law.
    Panelist(s):
  • Peter Tomka (Distinguished Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Federalism Strikes Back: Is the One-Voice Doctrine in Decline?

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    This panel will focus on the role of the several states and localities within the states, such as cities, in pursuing actions and relationships that shape foreign relations. For example, California, Massachusetts, and other states—on their own or through regional agreements—have enacted laws and regulations seeking to uphold targets and timetables consistent with climate change agreements. On the other side of the Atlantic, in the United Kingdom, sub-federal governments — such as Northern Ireland and Scotland, but also cities like London — have been playing an almost decisive role in the context of Brexit negotiations, holding separate negotiations with the European Union about a potential future relationship. Do these developments signal a new approach to foreign affairs and the end of the one-voice doctrine? The panel examines the current role of sub-federal entities in foreign affairs both within the US and the UK, as well as in cities across the globe.
    Panelist(s):
  • Marissa Jackson (Moderator)
  • David H. Moore (Speaker)
  • Janne E. Nijman (Speaker)
  • Dan Sarooshi (Speaker)
  • Shana Tabak (Speaker)
  • Michael J. Glennon (Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Senate v. President: A Moot Court on the President's Treaty Withdrawal Powers

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Recent skepticism of long-standing U.S. alliances and international institutions has reinvigorated the debate over the respective roles of the President and Congress in the withdrawal of the United States from treaties. One area where this issue has arisen concerns the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), where President Trump reportedly has suggested the possibility of a U.S. withdrawal, which in turn has triggered some calls in Congress for legislation that would preclude him from doing so. Using this as the backdrop, this session will take the form of a moot court to explore the extent of congressional vs. executive control over U.S. withdrawal from NATO. The session will address questions about the evolution of U.S. practice leading to the contemporary mainstream position asserting unilateral presidential withdrawal authority where a treaty itself contemplates withdrawal (as does the NATO treaty), what constitutional limits (if any) there are on that authority, and what may be learned from treaty withdrawal debates in other countries, including the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. The session will also look at the extent to which the Youngstown framework may support shared, as opposed to exclusive, authority over treaty withdrawal, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry.
    Panelist(s):
  • Scott Anderson (Moderator)
  • Ginger Anders (Counsel)
  • Chris Fonzone (Counsel)
  • Catherine Powell (Judge)
  • Donald Verrilli, Jr (Judge)
  • Curtis Bradley (Judge)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Late Breaking Panel: BREXIT and International Law

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Sponsored by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)

     The United Kingdom is scheduled to leave the European Union on Friday, March 29, 2019, having invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty two years prior, in 2017. Much is still unknown aboutthe UK’s impending exit, including whether an alternative agreement will be put in place, or whether the exit will take place as planned, on March 29, at all. But the plan to withdraw and the ongoing negotiations between the UK and the EU raise significant questions for both bodies, for their trading partners and allies, for corporate actors and investors, and for international law. This late-breaking panel will bring together experts from the UK, the EU, and others to discuss the international legal implications of Brexit and what role international law is likely to play in structuring, constraining, and enabling various political, economic, and cultural arrangements between actors both within and outside the UK.

    Panelist(s):
  • Oonagh Fitzgerald (Moderator)
  • Robert Howse (Speaker)
  • Jess Simonoff (Speaker)
  • Sir Michael Wood (Speaker)
  • João Rodrigues (Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Late Breaking Panel: Crisis in Venezuela

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Venezuela, until recently considered the richest country in South America, is in turmoil. The country has insufficient food and medicine for its people, has defaulted on billions of dollarsin debt obligations, is subject to crippling sanctions, and now faces a constitutional crisis with both Nicolás Maduro and Juan Guaidó claiming to be the rightful president of the Republic. The two rival governments are fighting for legitimacy in the eyes of their people and the international community, leading, among other things, to a crisis over the receipt of foreign aid and ownership over foreign state assets. The U.S., along with a growing number of other nations, has recognized Guaidó, the President of the National Assembly, as the interim President citing irregularities in the election process through which Maduro claimed the Presidency. On the other hand, others (both inside and outside Venezuela) still recognize Maduro’s authority. The current crisis raises new questions for governments, multinationals, aid agencies and counsel on their legal rights and obligations vis-à-vis Venezuela. This late-breaking panel will discuss the role of international law in this evolving crisis.
    Panelist(s):
  • Russ Dallen (Speaker)
  • Nicole Erb (Speaker)
  • Mary Ellen O'Connell (Speaker)
  • Alonso Gurmendi (Moderator)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    International Law and Interstellar Events: Who Speaks for Earth?

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    This session will examine what international law governs, or should govern, non-commercial State cooperation in space to address threats to global security. Through two hypotheticals, a panel of scientific experts and international and national security lawyers would examine the central question of who is empowered to make space-related decisions that could have profound effects on humankind. Hypothetical one is defensive – if a devastating asteroid is headed towards Earth, do capable states have individual or collective responsibilities to attempt to stop it? What bearing do arms control treaties have on the repurposing of anti-satellite weapons for the global defense? What is the Security Council's role under Chapter VII? If a state does attempt to intervene, may other states cite to Article VI and VII of the Outer Space Treaty or other sources of international law to hold it liable for any harm that results despite its efforts? Hypothetical two is affirmative – looking at previous efforts to reveal Earth and earthlings to sentient alien life forms, such as NASA's Voyager 1 and 2 Golden Records, and potential new attempts including Yuri Milner's Breakthrough Message competition. Does international law speak to whether one state, or a group of states, may broadcast Earth-identifying signals into space or to answer signals detected from an alien source? If it does not, what if any international legal rules or processes should be developed? What actors within a state should be able to speak for it – should government control such actions or are they fair game for private citizens?
    Panelist(s):
  • Shane Harris (Moderator)
  • Chris Borgen (Speaker)
  • Robin Frank (Speaker)
  • Andrea Harrington (Speaker)
  • Lindley Johnson (Speaker)
  • Foreign Nationals & National Security

    Sovereign Immunity Revisited: Immunity of states and their officials for atrocities or terrorist act

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    This session would explore and assess key national and international developments in the law of sovereign immunity. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rubin v. Iran, barring the attachment of Iranian antiquities located in the U.S. to execute judgments against Iran issued under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). Furthermore, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorist Act (JASTA) was enacted in 2016, essentially broadening the terrorism exception to FSIA. Also in 2016, the Supreme Court decided Bank Markazi v. Peterson, in which it sanctioned the turnover of about $1.75 billion in Central Bank of Iran assets to families of victims of terrorism. Subsequently, Iran brought a case against the United States at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Finally, [the African Union has successfully spearheaded efforts [are currently underway] at the United Nations to secure an ICJ advisory opinion on the immunity of heads of state and other senior officials, against the backdrop of attempts to prosecute Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir at the International Criminal Court. These developments highlight the tension between immunity and impunity when it comes to states and leaders engaged in terrorism or grave human rights violations. The panel will consider how recent U.S. cases and legislation have addressed this tension, and whether they are consistent with the international law on immunity. Questions will be posed by the moderator for rapid response by speakers addressing whether such immunity ought to be qualified in cases involving terrorism or grave human rights violations, and what, if any, other legal tools are available for addressing impunity in such cases.
    Panelist(s):
  • Chimène Keitner (Moderator)
  • John Bellinger (Speaker)
  • Marko Milanovic (Speaker)
  • Angela Mudukuti (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    Who's Minding the Farm? Trade Law and Agricultural Exports

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    It is widely agreed among economists that tariffs remain a major impediment to the financial security of farmers, particularly in the developing world, with clear corresponding implications for the long-term financial feasibility of agriculture in these countries. World Trade Organization members have agreed to eliminate export subsidies for agricultural products and to restrain export measures that have a similar effect on distorting prices in world agricultural markets ("Nairobi Package" 2015). However, despite these stated objectives, geopolitical realities make it clear that we are moving away, rather than towards these goals. For example, U.S. farmers now find the huge Chinese market partially closed in response to the current Administration's decision to levy tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods. In response, the Administration is offering an additional 12 billion dollars in subsidy-like support to U.S. farmers. Such steps raise questions regarding compliance with international trade agreements, which seek to eliminate subsidies that distort global agricultural markets and that have enormous consequences for farmers in the developing world. A roundtable of agricultural and legal experts will assess the commitments made in the Nairobi package in light of these recent geopolitical developments and discuss the implications of these developments for UN Sustainable Development Goal #2, which aims to "end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture."
    Panelist(s):
  • Jeannette Tramhel (Moderator)
  • Mohammed Coulibaly (Speaker)
  • Marsha Echols (Speaker)
  • Edwini Kessie (Speaker)
  • Katrin Kuhlmann (Speaker )
  • Sophia Murphy (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    UNCLOS: a Tool for Peace and Stability?

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has been called a Constitution for the Sea. The panel will evaluate whether UNCLOS acts as a legal institution to promote order and peace on the sea either in its codified form or as Customary International Law. Is UNCLOS a tool to alleviate ocean disputes and protect the environment? Or, does it fail to fulfill this role and bring order to the ocean? This will be examined in light of maritime disputes and arbitrations. In particular, panelists will discuss the results of the South China Sea arbitration and whether it has assisted negotiations in the area, whether it has fruitfully clarified entitlements, or whether it has led to a de-legitimization of the system. The panel will also discuss jurisprudence in contentious and advisory cases that have implications for the environmental movement, and broader meaning for UNCLOS jurisdiction. The panel will evaluate whether UNCLOS is a tool to assist the global community on issues that call for a global response. UNCLOS protections for living resources will also be examined; as will conservation of the sea including alleviating pollution and rising sea levels.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tracy Roosevelt (Moderator)
  • Freya Baetens (Speaker)
  • Henry Bensurto Jr. (Speaker)
  • Alan Boyle (Speaker)
  • John Norton Moore (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    The Critical Contribution of Law towards Global Efforts to Mitigate Disaster Risk

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Disaster Law Interest Group.The scale and impact of disasters is rising exponentially, with insurance sector cost estimates for 'natural' disasters increasing from $188 billion (2016) to $300 billion (2017). In response, the global shift since the 1990s, reflected in the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (2015-2030), has been towards concentrating resources on disaster prevention and mitigation, including through improved preparedness and response mechanisms. The Sendai Framework establishes ambitious goals, exhorting the development of innovative approaches and dynamic cross-sectoral partnerships. Yet, to date, the legal community has largely not been fully integrated into existing efforts or collaborations, including with the scientific, technological or health sectors. This is partly attributable to commonly poor levels of understanding about the dynamic role of law as a tool of disaster risk mitigation, including developing DRR law. As this panel explores, there is a critical need for public/private stakeholders, whether national or international, to more actively draw upon and embed legal instruments (e.g. international human rights, environmental, disaster, health and maritime law) within their mechanisms and responses to reduce disaster risk and impacts: for instance, through improving consistency and coherence of standards, strengthening existing weak governance mechanisms, ensuring greater compliance and accountability, whilst better protecting vulnerable populations.
    Panelist(s):
  • Katja Samuel (Moderator)
  • Kirsten Bookmiller (Speaker)
  • Guilio Bartolini (Speaker)
  • Michael Cooper (Speaker)
  • Hugo Cahueñas-Muñoz (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    Deep Seabed Mining in Crowded Oceans

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 3)

    Twenty-five years after entry into force of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Seabed Authority (ISA)'s efforts to regulate deep seabed mining present a salient case study in the challenges facing international organizations with respect to common ocean spaces. Set up to administer what was once regarded as a relatively empty and remote terrain, the ISA must now contend with crowded oceans: crowded with multiple users laying claim to the same areas, with overlapping jurisdictional regimes, and with fundamentally different conceptions of what sharing the ocean commons should mean. These tensions are increasingly coming to a head in the drafting of the ISA's mining code. Here, the ISA must balance a regime that is attractive to investors with one which meets developing States' needs for equitable sharing of benefits. At the same time, it must respond to NGOs' demands for effective protection of the marine environment and accommodate the growing strategic and political importance which certain States attach to seabed mining operations and other uses in our ever-shrinking oceans, including shipping, fishing, and laying submarine cables. Does the ISA have the capacity to manage these competing legal, economic, and environmental imperatives? Through what means should it engage with parallel and competing regimes of ocean use? Whose concerns will our deep seabed mining regime vindicate?
    Panelist(s):
  • Kent Bressie (Speaker)
  • Tara Davenport (Speaker)
  • Kate Neilson (Speaker)
  • Daniel Rincon (Speaker)
  • Stephen E. Roady (Speaker)
  • Isabel Feichtner (Moderator)
  • Global Commons

    Climate Change as a Concern in Negotiating Mine Development Agreements

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the Private International Law Interest GroupShould new mine development agreement include climate change mitigation as a consideration? The IBA's Model Mine Development Agreement addresses both environmental and social policies throughout the draft agreement. It does not, however, deal directly with climate change-related policies or with climate change-related mitigation efforts. This session will address how such issues might arise in the context of a mine development negotiation. The session will bring together four actors for a negotiation session at the beginning stages of negotiations of a mine development agreement – a host government representative, outside counsel for the international mining company, an NGO invited by the government particularly to address the concerns of indigenous peoples affected by the project and an academic participating as an expert with potential sway with a multilateral lending institution that could assist with funding for the project. The mock negotiations will focus on the broad concepts to be applied by the parties to address climate change mitigation in the mine development agreement. Following the mock negotiations, the players will step out of their roles to discuss the negotiation progress with the audience and highlight the conceptual challenges encountered by parties wishing to enter into a productive dialogue on climate change related questions of sustainable development and social licenses to operate.
    Panelist(s):
  • Diane Desierto (Speaker)
  • Teddy Baldwin (Speaker)
  • Tehtena Mebratu-Tsegaye (Speaker)
  • Poupak Bahamin (Speaker)
  • Frédéric Sourgens (Moderator)
  • Kabir Duggal (Moderator)
  • Global Commons

    Innovation and Compromise in the Paris Agreement: A model for the future?

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    At the twenty-fourth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in December 2018, Parties adopted the so-called Paris “rulebook,” a set of key implementation guidelines called for in the Paris Agreement. Following this pivotal meeting, a roundtable of experts will discuss the innovative structural features of the Paris Agreement and its rulebook; highlight compromises necessary for achieving consensus; and identify key challenges for its implementation. Have the innovations and compromises succeeded in formulating an effective response to climate challenges? Does the structure of the Paris Agreement provide the best framework for addressing the collective action challenges of climate change? What is the role of non-state or sub-national actors in the implementation of the Agreement, and what lessons from Paris can be applied to cooperation across non-Parties? Is the traditional form of binding multilateral environmental agreements between states a thing of the past? And what can the Paris model teach us for tackling other collective action on environmental challenges confronting the world today?
    Panelist(s):
  • Dan Bodansky (Moderator)
  • Julie Cerqueira (Speaker)
  • Rueanna Haynes (Speaker)
  • Todd Stern (Speaker)
  • Christina Voigt (Speaker)
  • Global Commons

    The Last Drop: Practical Tools for Addressing Transboundary Water Crises

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Global water crises are recognized as one of the biggest threats facing the planet, raising concerns about scarcity, environmental impact, and the potential for violent conflict. With more than 270 rivers and 600 aquifers crossing an international boundary, international cooperation is an essential condition for the optimal management and utilization of freshwater resources. Yet, as consumption continues to increase, to what extent are current mechanisms for the governance of transboundary water resources adequate to face the challenges posed by population growth, geo-politics, climate change, extreme weather events, and political instability? This panel, consisting of experts from different regions and institutions, will examine this question by focusing on a few current, real-world case studies. The panel will discuss how existing governance frameworks are faring under crisis and whether – drawing from other transboundary freshwater management mechanisms across the world – there might be other practical tools or best practices that could be applied to help mitigate the situation.
    Panelist(s):
  • Stephen McCaffrey (Moderator)
  • Susan Daniel (Speaker)
  • Chrisitna Leb (Speaker)
  • Hannah Lobel (Speaker)
  • Makane Mbengue (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Fragmentation in International Data Protection Law

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    In July 2018, Facebook experienced the biggest one-day loss of value in U.S. stock market history, which the company attributed, in part, to concerns about its ability to protect user privacy. The European Union has guaranteed its citizens the right to personal data protection since the adoption of the European Data Protection Directive in 1995, which it later enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (2000) and most recently clarified in its May 2018 General Data Protection Regulation. In contrast to the EU's fundamental rights approach, the United States has approached the problem of data protection from various sector-specific consumer protection frameworks. These contrasting approaches to data protection have resulted in significant transatlantic trade tensions most recently resolved through the U.S.-EU 2016 Privacy Shield Agreement. While there may be a growing need for legal rules to protect the processing of personal data, differences in cultural and legal approaches may foreclose greater harmonization or internationalization of legal rules in this area. This panel will explore recent efforts to address the issue of data protection at the national and bilateral level, consider the cost of compliance with these conflicting regulations for U.S. companies, and examine whether any multilateral approach to privacy protection is realistically available.
    Panelist(s):
  • Dawn Yamane Hewett (Moderator)
  • Justin Antonipillai (Speaker)
  • Peter Swire (Speaker)
  • Geff Brown (Speaker)
  • Carolina Rossini (Speaker)
  • International Business

    The Remedial Function in International Economic Law

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the International Economic Law Interest Group.

    Remedies are a perennial problem in international trade and investment law. Much attention has been given to difficulties with the technical calculation of damages in the context of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), or disentangling the remedial possibilities under the World Trade Organization rules or under free trade agreements. These questions are interesting and important. But this session will not linger on this well-trodden ground. Instead, participants will explore, compare, and reassess the remedial standards in both fields from the perspective of function and policy. As a baseline, it is clear that trade remedies are designed to be prospective, while remedies in ISDS are retrospective and compensatory. But to what end? What are the functions of these very different approaches? What policy aims are they designed to pursue? And how effective are they? Beyond mere enforceability, are the remedial aspects of these regimes fulfilling their purported functions? What ancillary legal concepts remain underdeveloped? The session will explore and compare the nature, function, and goals of the remedial systems in trade and investment as designed. The speakers will then turn to how these systems have developed in practice. The panel will consider what kinds of remedies are actually available (such as damages, preliminary measures, specific performance, and countermeasures), and whether they should be interchangeable. The panel will also explore the appropriate and available standards of damages (fair market value, reliance, restitution, etc.), as well as ancillary remedial concepts that may be underdeveloped in international case law (e.g., causation, mitigation, the presumption against speculative damages, and the new business rule). The panel will then turn to how these remedial mechanisms work in practice. The speakers will examine how effective they are in view of their intended ends. The panel will also examine whether these systems have developed new or underappreciated functions in practice.

    Panelist(s):
  • Julian Arato (Moderator)
  • Christina Beharry (Speaker)
  • Donald McRae (Speaker)
  • Patrick Pearsall (Speaker)
  • Jan Yves Remy (Speaker )
  • International Business

    Fourth Annual Detlev F. Vagts Roundtable on Transnational Law: Corporate Liability for Human Rights Violations after Jesner v. Arab Bank

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    This session made possible by a generous contribution from the Vagts Family. 

    In Jesner v. Arab Bank, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Alien Tort Statute could not be used to sue foreign corporations for human rights violations. This Roundtable will discuss possibilities for human rights suits against both U.S. and foreign corporations after Jesner. The paper will focus on European rules of jurisdiction and will outline the options for civil cases in Europe.The commentators will discuss the possibilities of U.S. and non-U.S. litigation from doctrinal, empirical, and litigation perspectives.

    Panelist(s):
  • William S. Dodge (Convener)
  • Lucas Roorda (Presenter)
  • Shayak Sarkar (Speaker)
  • Beth Stephens (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Litigating Climate Change: New Legal Challenges

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    Numerous lawsuits are being filed all over the world against a host of defendants, including multinational companies and governments, alleging that they are to blame for climate change that results in a violation of either national laws or international law. As examples: (a) nearly 900 Dutch citizens have filed a lawsuit in a district court in the Netherlands seeking that the court order the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions faster; (b) Greenpeace has appealed after an Oslo court rejected its argument that Norway's oil and gas exploration in the Arctic violates citizens' rights to a clean environment; (c) a Peruvian farmer who lives in Huarez, Peru, has brought a lawsuit against a German electricity producer alleging that it knowingly contributed to climate change by emitting greenhouse gases that bore some responsibility for the melting of mountain glaciers located near his hometown; and (d) a number of U.S. cities, such as New York, Oakland, and San Francisco, have filed climate change lawsuits against oil companies seeking to recover the cost of infrastructure needed to protect against rising sea levels. Additionally, the Permanent Court of Arbitration has advocated for the use of arbitration to resolve climate-change disputes, including disputes arising under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The panel will discuss these recent cases, as well as the success or failure of earlier litigation, with a view to understanding the role that international law will play in the climate change debate.
    Panelist(s):
  • Judith Levine (Moderator)
  • Kristin Casper (Speaker)
  • Michael Gerrard (Speaker)
  • Paula Henin (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Anatomy of a Trade War

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Following the tit-for-tat unilateral tariff measures implemented by the Trump Administration and U.S. trading partners in 2018, the viability of the multilateral trading regime is in question. The primary objective of that regime has been to promote global economic welfare by increasing the productivity of capital, labor, and agriculture. However, as economic integration and international trade commitments have deepened, the multilateral trading regime has clashed with competing national policy priorities most recently advanced through unilateral trade remedies. Do these recent measures signal a rise in economic nationalism and the downfall of the multilateral trading system? Do unilateral trade measures have any place in a multilateral, rules-based trading system? What is the effect of unilateral trade measures targeting specific industries or regions on the way U.S. trade policy is made? This session seeks to address the impact of the burgeoning trade war on the U.S. heartland, where these tit-for-tat tariff measures are both intended to help and expected to hurt. While the trade war is a moving target, the policies on the table now will continue to raise serious questions about the appropriate balance between national trade remedies and international trade law whether one is watching from the WTO, Washington, or Wichita.
    Panelist(s):
  • Ron Kirk (Speaker)
  • Kevin Brosch (Speaker)
  • Angela Hoffman (Speaker)
  • Kathleen Claussen (Moderator)
  • International Business

    Asia’s Response to the US Indo-Pacific Strategy

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    In 2018, the Trump Administration declared the "Free and Open Indo-Pacific" strategy as the new U.S. policy on Asia. The new Indo-Pacific strategy is expected to have far-reaching implications for U.S.-Asia relations. This roundtable will explore some of those issues, in particular, the impact of mega-free trade agreements and South China Sea disputes on international trade. Participants will discuss the extent to which international law facilitates or hinders US trade goals; the legal and political responses to U.S. policy available to nations in the Asia-Pacific Region; how recent diplomatic developments in China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) might serve as a counter-balance towards perceived U.S. unilateralism; and whether alternative strategies, such as the CPTPP, the RCEP and the Belt and Road Initiative, might shape international law and commercial transactions.
    Panelist(s):
  • Weixia Gu (Moderator)
  • Pasha Hsieh (Moderator)
  • Ronald Eberhard Tundang (Speaker)
  • Matthew Erie (Speaker)
  • Julian Ku (Speaker)
  • Inu Manak (Speaker)
  • International Business

    The European Commission and International Investment Arbitration: innovator, disruptor, spoiler?

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 1-2)

    The European Commission recently emerged as a dominant actor in international investment arbitration, shaping the reform agenda, urging a new dispute-resolution system, intervening in investment disputes, and requiring Member States both to terminate intra-EU investment treaties and decline to pay arbitral awards arising from them. In Achmea v. Slovak Republic, the Court of Justice of the European Union endorsed the Commission's view that EU law precludes application of an ISDS clause in a bilateral investment treaty between two Member States. Does the court's reasoning extend to all Member State investment treaties, or even to agreements to which the EU itself is a party, such as the Energy Charter Treaty? What are the implications of these developments for States, investors, and interested third parties?
    Panelist(s):
  • George Bermann (Moderator)
  • Andrea Bjorklund (Speaker)
  • Markus Burgstaller (Speaker)
  • Caroline Richard (Speaker)
  • International Business

    Closing Plenary: International Law as an Instrument for Development

    March 30 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    Co-sponsored by the Municipality of The Hague and Asser Institute for International and European LawInternational law has long been used as an instrument for economic development. Indeed, international rules and institutions have promoted trade and investment across borders, developed traditional and innovative techniques for monitoring implementation and resolving disputes, and helped harmonize development-related rules with other fields of international law, including human rights law and international environmental law. The 2015 UN Sustainable Development Goals set an optimistic agenda for using international law as a tool for accomplishing economic and human development in a sustainable manner between now and 2030. At the same time, studies indicate that while international programs of economic development have improved conditions for the worst off globally, nevertheless global economic inequality remains on the rise. Further, global competition, trends towards protectionism, and rapidly changing technology, all offer significant challenges to the use of international law to promote economic development, with natural disasters and climate change raising the spectre of long-term risk to economic growth, especially in developing nations. As such, leading figures question the efficacy of the use of international law and institutions to promote economic development. The closing plenary of the 2019 ASIL Annual meeting will bring together leading diplomats, practitioners, and academics to consider the past, present and future use of international law as an instrument for economic and human development. What has worked? What has not worked? What changes are needed for the future?
    Panelist(s):
  • Janne E. Nijman (Moderator)
  • Ulrik Vestergaard Knudson (Speaker)
  • Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Speaker)
  • Martijin Snoep (Speaker)
  • International Peace and Security

    Challenges and prospects for international peace and security: UN Peacekeeping, NATO, and the UDHR at 70

    March 28 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 5-8)

    The end of World War II and the establishment of the United Nations ushered in a new international legal order for the maintenance of international peace and security based on a commitment to multilateralism, non-use of force, and the promotion of human rights. Three important developments emerged shortly thereafter. In 1948, the first U.N. peacekeeping operation was launched, and though such action was not expressly envisaged in the U.N. Charter, it became the dominant means for U.N. efforts to address peace and security. That same year, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), partially in recognition that the preservation of such rights made inter-state conflict less likely. And in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was created to counterbalance the Eastern bloc, creating stability through deterrence. These three pillars of the international security architecture now enter their eighth decade, but has the world changed since their establishment in ways that challenge their continued viability?. U.N. peacekeeping is under-resourced and has struggled to end conflict; a backlash against the idea of universality has placed international human rights under immense pressure; and NATO has arguably failed to deter a resurgent Russia. On the occasion of their 70th anniversary, this roundtable will explore how recent developments have affected these pillars, and in particular, assess whether any or all of them can make an ongoing contribution to peace and security through the "rules-based international order." Have they failed to deliver on their original promise or have they adapted effectively to contemporary global realities? Is their future dependent on the continuation of Western hegemony and unity? Can they adapt to the changing nature of security threats, rising powers and a waning commitment to multilateralism? Are they instruments for peace, security and the promotion of international law? What challenges and opportunities lie ahead?
    Panelist(s):
  • Michael Doyle (Speaker)
  • Diane Marie Amann (Moderator)
  • Steven Hill (Speaker)
  • Bruce Oswald (Speaker)
  • Rita Siemion (Speaker)
  • International Peace and Security

    San Francisco 2.0: Constructing a Global Governance Architecture for the 21st Century

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    Organized by the International Organizations Interest Group.In 1945, world leaders gathered in San Francisco to sign the UN Charter, which laid the blueprint for the international system in place today. While it was well-suited for the post-World War II era, we now live in a world that is both multipolar and multiconceptual, in which nodes of power do not rest solely with States and the idea of global governance itself is being called into question.Rather than decrying the UN's shortcomings, let's be inventors. If the UN didn't exist, how would we construct it today? With experts from/on government, business, civil society, and international organizations, this simulation explores constitutional questions for a new global governance system. As a threshold matter, is a global governance organization needed? If so, who should be represented? How should it be structured? On the basis of these and other questions, the panel aims to draft a new "Charter" to address current challenges and to explore creative solutions to resolve them.
    Panelist(s):
  • Ian Johnstone (Moderator)
  • Lauren C. Baillie (Speaker)
  • Lisa L. Bhansali (Speaker)
  • Brian Bieron (Speaker)
  • Mohamed Helal (Speaker)
  • Tafadzwa Pasipanodya (Speaker)
  • International Peace and Security

    Emerging Technologies as a Source of Increased IHL Compliance and Enforcement

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    Recent discussion concerning emerging technologies and armed conflict have focused almost exclusively on whether these technologies can comply with international humanitarian law (IHL). This is a vital discussion and should certainly continue. However, a useful parallel discussion would contemplate the ways in which emerging technologies could enhance compliance with IHL. Many such technologies may have the potential to provide commanders and other decision makers with increased ability to make key IHL determinations and to conduct hostilities in a way that is more IHL compliant. This panel will be a mixed panel and proceed in two phases. The first phase will be a standard rapid response panel where the moderator will present concise questions or scenarios to the panelists and give each a chance to respond briefly (2 to 3 minutes) on the topic of emerging technologies and how they can assist in IHL compliance. The focus of the panel would be a more general discussion of the capabilities of emerging technologies, though comments on specific technologies would also be welcome. Examples of emerging technologies that have already assisted IHL compliance would be very useful. Phase 1 of the panel will last for no more than 60 minutes. Phase 2 of the panel will center around poster presentations where the audience could then view poster exhibits set up in the same room that deal with specific technologies that might be used for enhanced IHL compliance. These posters might highlight specific technologies such as drones, sensors, webcams, robotics, various autonomous systems and even nanotechnology. These posters would be created by individuals who have responded to an ASIL "Call for Posters." The poster submissions will have been reviewed and selected for presentation in advance. Presenters would stand by their posters and answer questions as the audience members walked around the room, viewing the various posters. The goal would be to have around 15 posters.
    Panelist(s):
  • Tess Bridgeman (Speaker)
  • Rebecca Crootof (Speaker)
  • Andrea Harrison (Speaker)
  • Dick Jackson (Speaker)
  • Ahmed Ghappour (Moderator)
  • International Peace and Security

    Legal Techniques for Resolving Armed Conflicts with Non-State Actors

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    In an age when armed conflicts with non-state actors are increasing around the world, often with no clear end in sight, international law and institutions play a critical but often hidden role in resolving such conflicts. From international lawyers negotiating the terms of ceasefire agreements and peace treaties to international institutions facilitating transitional justice and economic stability, international law and institutions are important instruments for addressing today's conflicts. This rapid-response discussion will highlight the unique experience and expertise of a diverse set of players who use international law or institutions to resolve armed conflicts involving non-state actors in a diverse range of entities from ISIS to the FARC. Experts will address such questions as how does one begin negotiating a peace deal with a non-state actor? What role does international law play in such agreements? What security, economic, or political conditions are essential for ending these types of armed conflicts? Are international law and its related institutions effective instruments for facilitating an end to such conflicts or have they failed to adapt to today's conflicts?
    Panelist(s):
  • Randa Slim (Moderator)
  • Kristen Boon (Speaker)
  • Margaux Day (Speaker)
  • Gregory Fox (Speaker)
  • Vikram Raghavan (Speaker)
  • International Peace and Security

    Theft in War: Using International Law to Rein in Pillage of Natural Resources

    March 30 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Columbia 3-4)

    The prohibition on pillage (theft) during war is a fundamental rule of international humanitarian law (IHL). When thinking about pillage, we usually envision invading armies storming villages for spoils of war. Yet, contemporary wars, and particularly natural resource wars, present complex questions on the scope and potential of the prohibition of pillage. While a belligerent may use natural resources of an occupied territory for the needs of the occupied population and to sustain its own forces, when does such use cross the line so as to constitute pillage? For instance, can pillage include granting concessions to corporations in conflict areas? Likewise, can land use by an occupying power amount, under some circumstances, to pillage? In recent years, the prohibition on pillage is increasingly used to address the growing problem of illegal exploitation of natural resources. The examples are numerous: the International Court of Justice found Uganda responsible for pillage of Congolese natural resources more than a decade ago. Since then, the Canadian and Dutch governments sponsored a major international conference at on pillage of natural resources; Swiss authorities began a formal criminal investigation against one of the leading gold refineries in the world; and Belgian authorities arrested a businessman for allegedly pillaging "blood diamonds" from Sierra Leone. Significantly, in recent months, the International Criminal Court announced a new prosecutorial policy that would give particular consideration to illegal exploitation of natural resources. Finally, the U.S. State Department created a new $2 million project to focus on training Congolese prosecutors on how to pursue these cases. Clearly, the legal fight against pillage is of growing importance in international law. What are the advantages and shortcoming of this development?
    Panelist(s):
  • Montse Ferrer (Moderator)
  • Ioannis Kalpouzos (Speaker)
  • Nico Schrijver (Speaker)
  • James Stewart (Speaker)
  • Signature Topic

    International Law as an Instrument to Regulate the Behavior of Non-state Actors in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    As more private actors enter ABNJs (private space companies, privately owned cruise vessels in the Arctic and off the coast of Antarctica, deep seabed miners, marine genetic material prospectors), conflicts between users, safety, and environmental damage become increasing concerns. This session will examine the behavior of non-state actors in ABNJs, the role of civil society non-state actors, and the governance role of states, including state responsibility for non-state actors, and the governance role of states. They may consider, for example, state responsibility for non-state actors; the relevance today of norms created at a time when states had the technical know-how (spacecraft, icebreakers) and incentives (science, security) to operate in ABNJs; private property interests and international community interests; and conflict management in BNJ. 

    This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Beyond National Jurisdiction: The Regulation of Human Activities in the Oceans, Polar Regions, Cyberspace and Outer Space.”

    Panelist(s):
  • David Balton (Speaker)
  • Marie Jacobsson (Speaker)
  • Chimène Keitner (Speaker)
  • Frans Von der Dunk (Speaker)
  • Lucinda Low (Moderator)
  • Signature Topic

    Preventing Violence and Atrocities through International Disarmament Law

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 11-12)

    Organized by the Nonproliferation, Arms Control, and Disarmament Interest Group.

     In the past five years, two landmark disarmament treaties were adopted: the Arms Trade Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Both were the result of sustained advocacy by civil society to develop disarmament law and arms control policies that would be effective at preventing violence and atrocities. This panel will discuss how relevant international stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations, governments and the UN community, use disarmament law and policy to prevent daily violence and mass atrocities. Panelists will discuss the development of the Arms Trade Treaty, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, their contributions to international disarmament law, their potential and actual impacts, as well as their gaps and limitations. 

    This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Atrocity Prevention: The Role of International Law and Justice.”

    Panelist(s):
  • Rebecca Gerome (Moderator)
  • Yasmine Ahmed (Speaker)
  • John Burroughs (Speaker)
  • Jean Krasno (Speaker)
  • Pranay Vaddi (Speaker)
  • Signature Topic

    Tabletop Simulation: Atrocity Prevention Decision-Making in the U.S. Government

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Columbia 9-10)

    This event will explore the interplay of law and diplomacy through a tabletop simulation showing how the U.S. interagency might respond to an unfolding mass atrocity. Rather than a traditional panel of presenters, the participants – all of whom were actively involved in these issues while in government -- will assume roles of Executive branch participants (State, DOD, Justice, Treasury, USAID, intelligence community, NSC) as the moderator presents the participants with information and reports about an emerging crisis. Participants would highlight the various atrocity prevention and response tools from which different entities can draw, identify domestic and international legal constraints, and explain other issues that affect their ability to respond effectively. Over the course of the session, the participants would canvass the different atrocity prevention responses available (diplomacy, sanctions, various forms of intervention within the framework of R2P or otherwise, and accountability mechanisms), explore how these tools can reinforce or conflict with each other, and reenact how the U.S. government interfaces with its allies and potential spoilers who will also be reacting to the situation.This event is part of the Society’s Signature Topic on “Atrocity Prevention: The Role of International Law and Justice.”
    Panelist(s):
  • Anna Cave (Moderator)
  • Brian Egan (Speaker)
  • Victoria Holt (Speaker)
  • Sarah Mendelson (Speaker)
  • Clint Williamson (Speaker)
  • Linda Thomas-Greenfield (Speaker)
  • IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Intellectual Property Law IG

    March 27 - 13:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law IG

    March 27 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    Aslı Ü. Bâli, Professor and Faculty Director of the Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA Law, will discuss transitional justice initiatives in Libya, Syria, and Yemen. In the midst of armed conflict, transitional justice measures are being promoted in these countries as a response to mass human rights violations. Professor Bâli will put these developments in a regional context and discuss how these initiatives differentially implicate domestic, regional, and international actors.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Economic Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The ASIL International Economic Law Interest Group business meeting will feature the presentation and expert critique of two unpublished papers by our Interest Group members that will be selected from a call for papers. The two unpublished papers for presentation will be selected and announced by Friday, March 1, 2019, and the two expert discussants will be identified and announced shortly thereafter.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Environmental Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Women in International Law IG

    March 28 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The Women in International Law Interest Group business meeting will feature a roundtable discussion and presentation of three to four papers selected from interest group members on a variety of topics in international law.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Space Law IG

    March 28 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Dispute Resolution IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The first part of the meeting will consist of a roundtable discussion featuring Meg Kinnear, the Secretary General of ICSID, who will discuss the current ICSID rules amendment process and Colin Brown, Head of the EU Delegation to UNCITRAL Working Group III, who will talk about the European Union’s systemic ISDS reform aiming to establish a multilateral investment court. In addition, DRIG ISDS Reforms Working Group member Margie-Lys Jaime will talk about recent initiatives in Latin America to reform ISDS, highlighting some of the disagreements that may exist among Latin American countries on these initiatives.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Human Rights IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The Human Rights Interest Group invites AM attendees to its business meeting, which will host a reporting panel on "International Human Rights Law in Practice." IG members will discuss amicus brief practice in U.S. courts, petitions to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, submissions to the U.N. Human Rights Committee, and the U.N. Global Compact for Migration.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Refugee Law IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    Please join us for IRLIG’s Business Meeting which will feature a hot topics discussion sparked by short presentations from Co-Chairs Guy Goodwin-Gill and Kate Jastram and IRLIG Member Luis Campos. Luis will present on emerging architectures of resistance, with an update on U.S. asylum law and policy and the legal bar’s response; Kate will brief on international law issues in Matter of A-B-, Grace v. Whitaker, and Innovation Law Lab v. Nielsen (challenging the “Remain in Mexico” program); and Guy will provide perspective on international refugee law in the face of crisis and chaos. We will also be honoring the winner of the 5th Annual International Refugee Law Student Writing Competition.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Latin America IG

    March 28 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild West)

    The Latin America Interest Group invites all AM attendees to its Business Meeting, which will feature an off the record round-table discussion on recent developments in Venezuela, focusing on the repercussions of the recognition by some countries and international institutions of the new interim government.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Legal Research IG

    March 29 - 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
    (Fairchild East)

    IG business meeting.

    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Legal Theory IG

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Cardozo)

    The International Legal Theory Interest Group business meeting will hold a roundtable presentation and discussion of papers presented by selected interest group members. The discussion will follow the theme of “New Perspectives in International Legal Theory,” and will feature presentations by the following scholars:

    • David Hughes, University of Michigan, “How States Persuade”
    • Karin Loevy, New York University, “AV Dicey, Humanitarianism, and the Legal Suffering ofRussian Jews” 
    • Valentina Vadi, Lancaster University, “Cultural Diversity in the Early Modern Law of Nations” 
    • Ka Lok Yip, Hong Kong University, “Reconceptualizing Norm Conflict in International Law”
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    ASIL-Midwest IG

    March 29 - 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM
    (Du Pont)

    ASIL Midwest invites all annual meeting attendees to its business meeting, which will feature a roundtable discussion on the unique challenges and opportunities related to teaching and practicing international law in the heartland. This discussion will be followed by presentations of recently published scholarship from IG members.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Criminal Law IG

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    The International Criminal Law Interest Group invites all AM attendees to its business meeting, which will consist of a roundtable discussion of current topics in international criminal law. The meeting will provide an opportunity for scholars and practitioners to present and discuss unpublished papers on relevant topics.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Lieber Society

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Cultural Heritage and the Arts IG

    March 29 - 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Law and Technology IG

    March 29 - 13:00 PM - 14:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    ILTechIG members will present and discuss ongoing writing, research and work projects in our area. One such presentation will be on net neutrality regulation policy; others may include prospects for US privacy legislation in light of the GDPR, the human rights impacts of trade in advanced technology, and the regulation of artificial intelligence.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    Government Attorneys IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Fairchild East)

    The Government Attorneys Interest Group invites AM attendees to its Business Meeting, which will focus on the topic "International Trade at a Crossroads." The discussion will feature a presentation from Kathleen Claussen, Associate Professor at the University of Miami School of Law and a veteran of the Office of the United States Trade Representative, who will lead a conversation on the future of international trade agreements as a tool of U.S. Government policy.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Courts and Tribunals IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Du Pont)

    IG business meeting.
    IG Business Meetings/Sessions

    International Law in Domestic Courts IG

    March 29 - 15:00 PM - 16:30 PM
    (Cardozo)

    The International Law in Domestic Courts (ILDC) interest group will devote its business meeting to the work of two emerging scholars within its membership. Elena Chachko will present a work-in-progress currently titled Administrative Foreign and Security Policy. Farshad Ghodoosi will present a work-in-progress currently titled Fall of Last Safeguard in Global Dejudicialization. The session will be structured to allow ample opportunity for audience participation.

    Sponsors

    ASIL thanks its 2019 Annual Meeting sponsors.

    It all happens at the ASIL Annual Meeting

    For four days each year, the leading authorities of international law gather in Washington, DC for ASIL's Annual Meeting. A tradition dating back over a century, it is a unique opportunity for publishers (print and online), law firms, academic institutions, corporations, nonprofits, and others to get in front of their target audiences and demonstrate their impact to the international law community.

    Please email partnerships@asil.org with any sponsorship related questions.