The 2022 Annual Meeting

Registration Opening Soon

The Society invites you to join us in Washington, D.C. on April 6-9 for the 2022 Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law. We are excited to be returning to the Washington Hilton for the first time since 2019, and we are committed to providing attendees with a safe and enjoyable experience. At the same time, we will be offering an attractive virtual option for those who are unable to be with us in person. Registration will open next week, and you may register to attend either in-person or virtually.

2022 Annual Meeting Theme: Personalizing International Law

As we emerge from one of the most isolating years in our memories, we invite reflection on how international law is experienced by individuals, communities, business organizations, and other non-state actors, the ways in which these actors shape international law, and how states might react to these efforts. From those combatting disease, seeking asylum, facing unemployment, resisting eviction, or struggling to access basic nutrition, to others who may just be wondering "what is the relevance of international law for me?" – this year's Annual Meeting focuses on how people, independently or collectively, interact with international law. Specifically, the 2022 Annual Meeting will examine how international law is experienced personally. Questions that will be addressed include:

  • How do individuals experience international law in their daily lives? 
  • How do non-State actors contribute or pose challenges to the creation, evolution, interpretation, and enforcement of international law?
  • What and who is prioritized in the public and private application of international law?

This focus is particularly significant today when the daily lives of most of the world's people have been upended and recalibrated by a global pandemic, massive economic losses, climate challenges, and persistent racial injustice. In this time of crisis convergence, the Society's Annual Meeting is a call to examine the ways that international law meets or fails people's expectations and to explore ideas of how international law can better address these and other challenges.

2022 Annual Meeting Co-Chairs

Rachel Lopez, Drexel University Kline School of Law
Kish Parella, Washington & Lee University School of Law
Patrick Pearsall, Allen & Overy LLP

2022 Annual Meeting Committee Members

Noha Aboueldahab, Brookings Institution
Yousuf Aftab, Atelier Aftab (A2)
Payam Akhavan, Permanent Court of Arbitration
Nicolas Angelet, Doughty Street Chambers
Chloe Baldwin, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Richard Chen, University of Hawai'i William S. Richardson School of Law
Margaret deGuzman, Temple University Beasley School of Law
Harpreet Kaur Dhillon, Twitter
Charles Di Leva, World Bank (retired)
Basak Etkin, Université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas
Alice Farmer, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees
Craig Gaver, Allen & Overy LLP
Berihun Adugna Gebeye, Central European University
Andrea Harrison, International Committee of the Red Cross
Brett Hartley, Morgan Stanley
Lisa Hayles, Trillium Asset Management
Marissa Jackson Sow, St John's Law School
Maryam Jamshidi, University of Florida Levin College of Law
Keri-Ann Jones
Karin Kizer
, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State
Sarah Lee, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Tim Longman
CJ Mahoney, Microsoft
David Mortlock, Willkie Farr & Gallagher
Trang (Mae) Nguyen, Temple University Beasley School of Law
Priya Pillai, Asia Justice Coalition
Jessica Polebaum, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Carla Reyes, SMU Law School
César Rodríguez-Garavito, NYU Law School
Waikwa Wanyoike, Open Society Justice Initiative
Can Yeginsu, Four New Square

2022 Thematic Tracks:

  • International Law Beyond the State
  • "What about me?": Exploring Relevance for the Individual
  • The Isolationist Challenge
  • Community, Social Movements, and International Law
  • Navigating Crisis Convergence
  • The Competing Values of International Law

Conference Registration - In-person and Virtual

Registration Opening Soon.


Rates Early Bird
(ends Feb. 15)
(ends Apr. 4)
ASIL Member $505 $615
ASIL Member (virtual) $310 $375
Non-Member** $705 $840
Non-Member (virtual)** $435 $530
GOV/IO/NGO Member $245 $370
GOV/IO/NGO Member (virtual) $150 $225
GOV/IO/NGO Non-Member** $440 $570
GOV/IO/NGO Non-Member (virtual)** $270 $350
Speaker - Member $285 $285
Speaker - Member (virtual) $175 $175
Speaker - Non-Member** $385 $385
Speaker - Non-Member (virtual)** $235 $235
AM Committee $285 $285
AM Committee (virtual) $175 $175
Student - Member $100 $100
Student - Member (virtual) $0 $0
Student - Non-Member $125 $125
Student - Non-Member (virtual) $0 $0

CLE Credit Processing

$75 $75

**Includes one-year ASIL membership.

All prices are in U.S. Dollars (USD)
If you cancel on or before February 23, you may request a full refund, less a $25 processing fee, unless you wish to donate all or part of your refund. If you cancel after February 23 and on or before March 31, you may request a 50% refund, less a $25 processing fee, unless you wish to donate all or part of your refund.

No refunds will be available for cancellations made after March 31, 2022, unless you notify us that:
(a) You are unable to obtain a visa for entry into the United States; or
(b) You are prevented from attending the Annual Meeting due to Covid-related restrictions, such as travel or quarantine requirements.

All cancellation and refund requests should be directed to ASIL Services at

2022 Annual Meeting Sessions by Track

Title: Privatizing International Governance

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights both encourage engaging business groups as partners in developing global governance agendas. Such multi-stakeholder and public-private partnerships are increasingly common and seen as essential to the future of international business regulation. The participation of affected groups brings expertise, promotes engagement and buy-in, and secures funding. At the same time, critics have raised alarms about industry capture of the UN climate change bodies, global financial governance institutions, and international public health standard-setting efforts. In response, institutions like the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization are implementing reforms to prevent mission-distortion by business groups. At a time when multilateral cooperation is at an ebb, public-private partnerships are indispensable, and yet the danger of undue influence is real. The time is therefore ripe to consider how to productively engage business groups in global governance. This roundtable of experts will discuss cutting-edge efforts by international organizations to capture the benefits of business participation while reducing the harms. The roundtable will consider access rules, existing and proposed reforms, and how past experience may offer lessons for future challenges.

Title: Human Rights Law Beyond the State? From state-centric to person-centric global order

The panel will analyze a widely-debated problem of state-centrism of contemporary international law and will consider whether a shift to person-centric global order could offer a viable alternative for a better realization of human rights. From normative and practical perspectives, the panel will discuss whether it is necessary and possible to shift from a state-centric to person-centric global order. Particularly, it will focus on three interrelated themes. First, how can individuals - especially the most vulnerable, underrepresented, and marginalized- fully and meaningfully participate in local and global institutions and practices, including important decision-making and norm-setting processes? Second, how can we acknowledge and institutionalize non-state actors as agents of justice and duty-bearers of human rights? Third, how can we reshape inefficient state-centric, bureaucratic and top-down governance and accountability systems and incorporate alternative bottom-up, inclusive, participatory and person-centric systems to promote human rights in different settings? The panel will also consider how this shift would influence the unique and essential role of the state in realizing human rights. In particular, how the suggested measures would make the state more accountable to persons and at the same time stimulate its' transformation into a human-centric and rights-based political union.

Title: Digitalization of Human Rights

More and more our social interaction occurs in digital space.  As the way we interact with each other changes, do the way our rights are expressed and recognized also change? What happens when our technologies continue to change (e.g. transitions to a shared virtual reality/metaverse)? How enforceable are such rights when the technology, platforms, and people that interact through them span multiple international boundaries and legal jurisdictions? What is the role and responsibilities of the digital platforms themselves? This session will explore the migration of human rights into cyberspace and how those rights may change by exploring how each article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights might be transferred to digital space.  There will also be a discussion of whether a coordinated international approach to these issues is preferable and whether such an approach is even plausible.

Title: NSAGs and Good Governance: Challenges and opportunities for the realization of basic human rights


The delivery of traditional public goods by Non-State Armed Groups (NSAGs) is far from unique. For example, following territorial gains in Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State group established courts to determine legal disputes, a bureaucracy that collected taxes and rubbish, and intervened in markets, setting prices for housing rents and medicines. Other examples include the activities of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka and the Taliban in Afghanistan. More recently, the role NSAGs may play facilitating adequate healthcare has been brought into focus by COVID, with some NSAGs adopting measures to contain the virus, such as screening and lockdowns, and seeking support from governments and aid agencies to access and distribute vaccines. The intersect between NSAGs and the delivery of, for example, healthcare, education, and justice, is far from trivial given the ICRCs estimation that over the past years "tens of millions of people lived in areas controlled by [NSAGs] and thus outside of regular services provided by state-run governance systems". The panelists will explore the legal and practical challenges and opportunities for the realization of basic human rights, such as access to healthcare, in the context of NSAGs seeking to govern. 

Title: Territory, Tribe, and Trade: The symbiotic relationship between States and individuals in State-State dispute settlement

For centuries, the State has been the central actor in international law.  At the core of State relations are territory and trade – and disputes between States over boundaries and cross-border economic activity have produced many of the key public international law principles.  But the legal fiction of the State as the central actor of international law obscures the reality that State actions result from individuals and the international rules governing States action in fact govern individuals.   This session will examine how State-State disputes over boundaries and trade emerge from the actions of individuals and how their resolution affects individuals on different sides of a boundary, whether it remains fixed or changed.  In looking as selected disputes from the prism of the individual actions that cause State-State disputes and how the rules resolving the disputes impacted those individuals, the session will take on the theme of "What about me?" in international law, highlighting not just how individuals experience international law in their daily lives and contribute to its creation, but what elements of their experience do State-State disputes take into account and which are jettisoned or ignored.  Examples of the symbiotic relationship between States and individuals include issues the determination of compensation for impacts on livelihood, the displacement of individuals or communities when boundaries are redrawn, and how trade rules can create winners and losers both at home and abroad.  Case studies will include the Eritrea-Ethiopia boundary dispute, the dispute between the United Kingdom and Mauritius over the Chagos islands, the dispute between the Philippines and China over the South China Sea under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the WTO dispute between the United States and Mexico over dolphin-safe tuna restrictions.

Title: International Disaster Law Simulation Exercise

International disaster response law (IDRL) is an area of law that has direct implications for individuals and communities, and has been strongly influenced by non-State actors. This session will primarily focus on the Guidelines on the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Assistance ("IDRL Guidelines"), developed by the International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC), which make recommendations on how domestic laws and policies can facilitate international disaster assistance. The exercise will permit participants to appreciate the real-life impacts of IDRL on disaster-affected communities and to learn about the practical application of IDRL norms.  After a brief introduction, participants will be introduced to a detailed and realistic disaster scenario, featuring a fictional country that has experienced a calamitous natural disaster and has requested international assistance.  Throughout the session, there will be a series of further 'injects' requiring the participants to encounter regulatory barriers that impede their ability to enter the country and provide assistance, as well as problems relating to the quality and coordination of assistance. Participants will break into small groups to discuss how adherence to international legal norms and domestic legal preparedness for international disaster assistance could have prevented or mitigated the problems encountered.

Title: Can Alternative Accountability Mechanisms Provide Effective Human Rights Remedy to Project-Affected Communities?

Energy and infrastructure projects are the lifeblood of international development. They are essential to deliver on the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals and advance human dignity for the most vulnerable. But such projects often have devastating impacts on neighboring individuals and communities—from violations of labor and indigenous rights to forced displacement and environmental harms, among others. Accountability for such harms is a perennial challenge. International tribunals have limited authority over private actors. National courts in host and home countries are frequently inaccessible for reasons legal and practical. To address this lacuna, alternative accountability mechanisms (AAMs) are receiving increasing attention in legal scholarship and practice. AAMs capture a variety of private mechanisms to resolve project-related human rights, environment, and integrity complaints through investigation, mediation, or adjudication. The embrace of AAMs, however, masks a certain nebulousness of aims and potential. AAMs come in myriad shapes and sizes. Their ideal form is uncertain. So too is their ability to deliver meaningful redress with reference to international human rights law. The challenges are as much conceptual as they are practical. This session will seek to wrestle with these challenges to derive practical recommendations for more effective and legitimate AAMs.

Title: Indigenous Languages in Focus: Welcoming the decade of indigenous languages

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples provides that Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their languages. It also calls on states to take effective measures to protect this right. Other international instruments may also support the protection of indigenous languages, including article 27 of the ICCPR, article 15 of the ICESCR and article 27 of the UDHR. However, Indigenous languages are critically threatened, with United Nations estimates suggesting that one indigenous language dies every two weeks. Indeed, despite guarantees in the UNDRIP and related protections in the ICCPR, ICESCR and the UDHR, States continue to engage policies that place less value on the preservation of indigenous languages or even deny the existence of Indigenous Peoples in an effort to assimilate them into a homogenized state. This issue is particularly pressing. Climate change will place increasing pressure on Indigenous languages, as environmental harms affect Indigenous Peoples most severely. Yet, indigenous languages are crucial to community membership and underpin indigenous health, heritage, identity, connection to land and self-determination.

Title: Global Health Law and the Issue of Compliance: What will make the global system work?

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the significant challenges facing the international approach to pandemic preparedness and response. Weaknesses in national preparedness and response systems as well as the lack of well-coordinated international responses contributed to the breadth and depth of this pandemic. We have now clearly realized the absolute necessity of a functioning global system as the lives of individuals around the world depend on it. The International Health Regulations (IHR), first adopted in 1951 by the member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) and revised significantly in 2005, address national capacities, the system of global warning, and coordinated responses. States that do not opt out of the IHR are legally required to align domestic law and policy to achieve the objectives of the IHR. All WHO member states are parties to the IHR. While the IHR stand as a foundation for pandemic preparedness and response, the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed critical areas that were not addressed. These include: the sharing of pathogens and genetic sequence data, access to benefits, and equitable access to vaccines. The member nations of WHO are now considering the need for a new global convention or treaty for pandemic preparedness and response. The IHR carry WHO's clearest legal authority but compliance remains an outstanding and seemingly insurmountable challenge. A recent review of the IHR, assessing the IHR's effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic, echoes earlier review recommendations including the observation that an effective approach for compliance is lacking. Reviews stated: "The most important structural shortcoming of the IHR is the lack of enforceable sanctions (2011)" and "the IHR has no teeth (2021)". Compliance with the existing IHR and the new pandemic preparedness and response instrument (however it evolves) is central to the success of the global health system. How can compliance be strengthened, assured, and is that it even possible?

Title: Safeguarding Freedom of the Press: The role of international law

Free, independent, and fact-based journalism affords the public one of the best means of discovering and forming an opinion on the ideas and attitudes of their political leaders. It serves as essential protection against abuse of power and misinformation. It enables everyone to participate in the free political debate which is at the very core of the concept of a democratic society. Today, the free press and independent journalists are under attack in many places around the world like never before, as authoritarian regimes make every effort to supress the free flow of information, so as to control what constitutes the truth. While freedom of expression and freedom of the press are well established rights in national and international law, the reality is that fewer than 1 in 10 people live in a country with a free press, and even some of the most established of democracies have become unsafe places for journalists. If the existing international framework for protection is not working, what more must be done to safeguard and promote media freedom around the world? And what, in particular, is the role of international law in answering this critical question?

Title: Trade, International Law, and Workers: Is the system working?

Rising populism is driven by the perception—if not the reality—that there is a disconnect between the ambitions of elites and the concerns of ordinary working people. Key international law doctrines are being challenged in this environment, particularly in the area of international trade. Trade liberalization has been good for consumers, exporters (including farmers), and many multinational corporations, but it has subjected workers to intense wage competition from countries with low wages and questionable human rights records. Is international law, as embodied in the global trading system, a threat to working people? Does it have any relevance at all? Are there situations in which policymakers in the United States should prioritize compliance with international law and norms over policies that benefit its own citizens, particularly the most vulnerable? This session will explore international law's effects on and relevance for workers and farmers. The Trump Administration responded to concerns about the effects of international trade rules on working people by breaking conventions and aggressively pursuing policies intended to rebalance trade. The Biden Administration despite differences in tone and tactics has by and large accepted key tenets of its predecessor's trade policy, seeking to adopt a "worker-focused" trade policy. What is the impact of these developments, and can internationalists offer a compelling critique or push an alternative vision? These topics will be the subject of a debate between leading critics of the international trading system and leading defenders.

Title: Can You Hear Me? Speech and power in the global digital town Square

With the modern marketplace of ideas and discourse increasingly centered online on digital platforms, cutting across territorial borders and communities, international law scholars and practitioners are grappling with challenging questions of who gets to speak, who gets heard, and perhaps most importantly, who gets to decide or to influence the answer to such questions. A critical confrontation of international law in the information age, its impact is felt at the individual, community and global level in social movements and regulation that requires the participation of governments and private corporations. This will be explored in a cutting-edge roundtable that brings together legal experts from various disciplines, including human rights, technology law and social activism. They will address through thematic case studies what the right to free speech means in the digital age; whether there are issues specific to the right being thus exercised that international law does not have ready answers to; and if iterative rules are demanded or are being applied at present, what actors ought to be involved and the power dynamics it occasions. As the paradigm shift in how international law operates in our individual daily life continues to play out, are we prepared, and will we be heard?

Title: Close to Home: The role of families in personalizing international law

This roundtable will address a major, but overlooked, issue pertaining to Personalizing International Law – the role of families. To understand how individuals experience international law in their daily lives, we must examine the role of families in shaping, implementing, and experiencing international law. Indeed, it is in families that human rights take root. Families around the world usually serve as the purveyors and guarantors of human rights for their members, especially children. The right to an "adequate standard of living," for example, is assured for children by parents who provide sustenance and ensure they have a roof over their heads. International family law straddles both private and public international law. Several international legal instruments require the state to recognize the rights of the family as an entity, as well as the rights of the individual family members. But what happens when parents undermine the human rights of their children or others? What are the state's obligations in these cases? Under what circumstances should international law prioritize other rights over those of the family? Such dilemmas profoundly affect families, their members, and how international law is experienced by diverse individuals, communities, and societies.

Title: Policing Black Women: Challenges and opportunities for international law

The conversations concerning policing in Black communities worldwide consistently erase or sideline the lived experiences of Black womxn and girls, as victims and survivors of police brutality and neglect, as advocates for police reform and abolition, and as potential targets for civilian vigilantism and community policing. Women of African descent are disproportionately negatively impacted by assaults on women's rights and assaults on the rights of people of African descent, and policing is often a vehicle for these negative impacts. Foundational work on these issues has been carried out by prominent legal scholars such as Patricia Williams and Dorothy Brown, and in fact, Black women are at the forefront of contemporary human rights movements across the globe. There exists an opportunity for international enforcement bodies to engage and support these women and their activism in a way that leads these enforcement bodies and mechanisms to adapt to contemporary human rights-related realities. Yet, despite their leadership in advocacy, Black women's interests remain underrepresented within national and international legal systems. This session will feature three conversations: The first will focus on the tensions between women's rights advocates seeking to abolish or overhaul policing and those feminists who rely on police for protection in societies where violence against women is otherwise supported by social and community norms. A second conversation will consider the contributions of the Black Lives Matter movement, Womanist theory, Critical Race Theory, and Post-Colonial theory to contemporary global Black women's rights movements. The third conversation will consider whether international law has a role to play in contemporary Black women's rights movements, and if so, how the movements and international law might strengthen and support each other.

Title: Where's the Community? Contours, place, and role of communities in international law and participatory governance

Community participation has become a common trope in global governance, international agreements and social movements in a range of international law fields, from human rights to international criminal law to cultural heritage to environmental governance. Institutions as diverse as the World Bank, UN human rights bodies, Indigenous peoples' networks and international business associations profess support for very different conceptions of community and participation through a plethora of legal mechanisms, including community consultations and free, prior and informed consultation and consent. And yet the meaning, role and impact of communities in international law remain elusive and underexamined.  This panel brings aims to debate and clarify these key issues by bringing together leading voices from different institutional, conceptual, geographical and practical perspectives.

Title: Climate Change and Global Migration: Locating international law in the defining crisis of our times

There is no crisis more urgent today to tackle than climate change. It has a devastating impact on millions – floods, forest fires, food insecurity – which is only set to become more pronounced. The impact on the everyday life of individuals is undeniable. A looming problem to grapple with is how international law adapts and interprets the climate crisis in relation to global migration and displacement – within borders, as well as across borders. There are multiple issues that arise from this phenomenon, that we are only just beginning to comprehend. Are norms that have evolved relating to refugee law adequate in encompassing the new patterns of migration that will emerge as a result of climate change, or do we need to bring a new perspective and approach to these issues? How do inhabitants of low-lying island states – that are in danger of complete annihilation – articulate legal claims and remedies? How will climate displacement affect atrocity prevention efforts, given competition and conflict over scarce resources? The impact of these questions on the daily lives of millions makes this a critical discussion, for us and for future generations.

Title: A Treaty on Single Use Plastics? Climate change at the intersection of global governance and individual choice

Some 500 billion plastic bottles and 5 trillion plastic bags are used every year with catastrophic consequences on the environment, including the unprecedented pollution of the world's oceans and decline of marine life.  At the convergence of climate change, biodiversity, and food security, this crisis must be addressed at multiple levels from global governance to individual consumer choice.  This session addresses the growing momentum for adoption of a treaty on single-use plastics, including the potential influence of domestic legislation and grassroots shifts in consumer behaviour on the progressive development of international legal norms and institutions regarding climate change.

Title: Small Arms Control: Halting proliferation or internationalizing the gun control stalemate?

The destructive impacts of small arms proliferation is well-documented, including in Afghanistan and Mexico. A nascent effort to regulate small arms is growing in international law, including some treaties in the early stages of adoption, particularly the UN Arms Trade Treaty, which was signed and then revoked by the United States. In recent years, though, individual states have taken more urgent action to stem the flow of illegal small arms. The U.S. President in 2020 issued an Executive Order authorizing sanctions on persons who facilitated the flow of conventional weapons to Iran. And Mexico has brought a lawsuit in U.S. courts against gun manufacturers based on the increased gun violence in Mexican drug trafficking. Are these unilateral responses likely to stymie multilateral action against proliferation? Furthermore, gun rights advocates in the United States have reacted strongly against any international efforts perceived as limiting gun ownership rights, including sanctions against Russian gun manufacturers in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Are any hopes of international action a non-starter in light of U.S. domestic pressures on the gun control debate?

Title: The Climate Change Gap: Inequalities, narratives, and international law

This session addresses inequalities in the face of climate change from three perspectives. From a geographical perspective, climate change engenders or aggravates inequalities, e.g., because of its impact on small island States and on drought-prone countries in the southern hemisphere. From a temporal perspective, climate change is a challenge for intergenerational justice, and confronts countries with differing degrees of emergency. From the perspective of human condition, it increases poverty and hunger, gender inequality, and the subordination of nature to human activity. The session analyzes these inequalities through a triple spectrum: testimonies, narratives, and international law. The first, factual, spectrum focuses on short video testimonies of individuals who are either victims of climate change, or grass-root activists. Each video addresses a distinct form of inequality. The narratives spectrum seeks to determine what the testimonies reveal on the individuals' perception of the role of international law. It analyzes the objectives pursued with these narratives with their pros and cons. The third spectrum relates the testimonies and narratives to relevant rules of international law:  the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities, the respective roles of mitigation and adaptation, human rights and rights of nature, international peace and security, etc.

Title: Afghanistan and the Future of International Law

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Taliban assumption of power in late August 2021 has sent shockwaves throughout the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. The event has been construed by some to signal the end of American nation-building overseas, yet the effects for the region, international relations, and international law may be more complicated than this one-sided reading. Most immediately, the victory of the Taliban regime raises basic human rights questions for the people of Afghanistan including security, subsistence, public health, education, and justice. The World Health Organization has warned that up to a million Afghan children face the danger of starvation this winter. Neighboring states are faced with both refugee inflow and the resumption of trans-border crime syndicates. Further afield, a Taliban-led Afghanistan tilts the ever-fragile U.S.-China relationship towards Chinese approaches of aid and development, as the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has announced that China will provide aid and investment to the country in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal. For Afghan children, women, and refugees, as well as those with views that differ from the Taliban's, international law questions surrounding the future of Afghanistan could not be more personal. As such, Afghanistan thus is the center of a number of critical questions of international law, including the recognition of states, humanitarian intervention, use of force, human rights and sharia, law and development, corruption, and transitional justice. This roundtable, comprised of experts from government, think tanks, academia, and the Afghan judiciary, will examine these issues from their diverse professional and disciplinary perspectives.

Organized by the Asia-Pacific Interest Group

Title: Challenges to Liberal-Led International Law

Today's international legal order and institutions, deeply infused with liberal and neoliberal values, are undergoing what many predict to be a seismic shift. In addition to domestic contestation within democracies, the current international order is being challenged by rising powers, most notably China, who are modifying existing institutional institutions as well as creating news ones that better fit their interests and worldviews. This represents a diverging normative vision on how societies should be organized, how power should be allocated, and what constitute the appropriate roles and values of international law. These challenges can be substantively "thick," gravitating towards particular visions of international law such as non-intervention in states' domestic affairs, economic-oriented human rights, and informal norms of dispute resolution. They can also be "thin," united by discontent with liberal values without necessarily offering a comprehensive prescription for the alternative. Whether thick or thin, they form a common ground that bring to the fore the value-laden cleavages that have long lurked within international law and that may not be limited to regime type or political system. Drawing on expertise from a range of substantive areas, including in human rights, international relations, and security, this panel explores how these competing visions actively shape the development of international law, norms, and institutional practices. The focus is on both drawbacks and opportunities. Are the current positive values and achievements of international law under threat, or will this also open up new and promising venues that can further the collective goal of human prosperity?

Title: Realizing Solidarity through International Law

The concept of solidarity in international law could be of vital importance in this moment. In an age dominated by regional and global challenges, cross-border solidarity, both at the state and grassroots levels, is critical to addressing many of these threats. But competing international law conceptions of solidarity make its implementation challenging and its relevance to non-state and non-governmental actors, like transnational solidarity movements, unclear. It is necessary, therefore, to reflect on solidarity's place within international law and relationship to popular solidarity efforts on the ground. How does international law conceive of solidarity and what is its role in different fields, like human rights, humanitarian, and environmental law? How do regional arrangements, like the EU and AU, conceptualize solidarity? Are there disconnects and/or unifying themes within these conceptions? How are these often state-centric notions of solidarity relevant to individual actors or groups building solidarity across borders? In what ways are these international law conceptions emancipatory and in what ways are they exclusionary for these movement actors? How do conceptions of solidarity in international law comport and/or conflict with how movement actors conceive of solidarity? How can international law norms on solidarity better support these movements going forward?

Title: Debate: Is global justice (re)turning to restorative approaches? Should it?

Early global efforts to promote justice for large-scale human rights violations had a significant restorative focus, with truth commissions often being the modality of choice. In particular, the South Africa Truth and Reconciliation Commission was touted as a model of restorative accountability. Beginning with the establishment of the ad hoc tribunals, however, global justice took a sharp turn toward the punitive. The ICC is premised on the idea that "the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished." International human rights courts have struck down amnesties for international crimes, and the United Nations has refused to support amnesty provisions in peace agreements. Civil society organizations have declared that there could be "No Peace Without (criminal) Justice," and scholars have identified a duty to prosecute serious human rights violations. On this panel, scholars, activists, and government lawyers will debate whether the global community is beginning, or should begin, a (re)turn toward restorative approaches to justice for widespread human rights abuses. Evidence of such a return arguably exists, for instance, in the Colombian peace agreement, which makes space for amnesties and community service for certain serious human rights violations, including war crimes, as well as in the ICC's response to the Colombian efforts.

Title: Competing for the Spotlight: Law-making for whom?

For the better half of the 20th century, international law was created by and for states. However, over the last few decades, there has been a notable shift in the work of actors involved in international law-making such as the International Law Commission. Instead of producing legal instruments aimed at assisting states in drafting treaties, these actors increasingly produce statements of principles, guidelines, and conclusions meant for the consumption and use of non-state actors, including international judges and arbitrators, NGOs, corporations, academics, and even domestic judges. What should we make of this shift in international law-making? To what extent is the shift to addressing non-state actors intentional? Substantively and formally, what changes when there is a non-State audience? Furthermore, taking a step back, does this shift tell us something more fundamental about our global legal order? For instance, does it reflect a decreased relevance of the state and state consent in international law-making or rather just a diminishing interest in multilateral treaties? Is this the sign of a more structural shift, from an actor-based order to a value-based one?

Title: The Reformation of International Tax: Competing models and their winners and losers

The landscape of international tax is in flux. Changing circumstances (like iterative recessions and pandemics) and dramatic revelations (like the Panama and Pandora papers) have laid bare serious weaknesses in the extant international regime – based largely on bilateral double taxation treaties. Yet we may be witnessing a moment of dramatic change in the regulation of international tax. Many governments are actively considering an array of unilateral, bilateral, and multilateral reforms to international tax disciplines. These range from sector-specific taxation like taxes on digital services, procedural anti-arbitrage mechanisms like the OECD work on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), and substantive reforms like an international minimum corporate tax. Although the regulation of international tax represents a pillar of international economic law, it has received far less attention among generalist international lawyers than the regulation of trade, investment, and finance. Yet the world of international tax cuts across all of these fields, interacts with them, and touches upon many of the same tensions: efficiency, fairness, and egalitarian distribution; bilateralism versus multilateralism; sovereignty versus domination; and individualism versus communitarianism – among many other familiar matters. This panel will explore the problems with contemporary international tax governance and think through the trade-offs of the leading alternatives for reform. It will focus in particular on who stands to gain from reform – as between individuals, businesses, states, and/or regions (Global North versus Global South).

Organized by the International Economic Law Interest Group


It all happens at the ASIL Annual Meeting

For several days each year, the leading authorities of international law gather 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.

For full details on 2022 sponsorship opportunities, please review the ASIL Annual Meeting Sponsorship Prospectus (PDF). To reserve sponsorships, please visit or email

2022 Annual Meeting Frequently Asked Questions

Downloadable PDF Version

The 2022 Annual Meeting is being presented in two formats. You may register to attend either in-person or virtually. Registration is available online only. There will be no onsite registration. To register for the in-person meeting, you will need to comply with the vaccination policy described in this document.
These FAQs will be updated as needed.

In-Person Access to the Annual Meeting

A1: What is included in the registration fee?
The registration fee includes in-person access to:

  • All plenaries, keynotes, and other substantive sessions (The complete list of all sessions is posted at
  • ASIL interest group meetings and social events
  • Receptions
  • The Exhibit Hall
  • Professional development sessions

A2: Are hotel charges included in the registration fee?
Hotel charges are not included in the registration fee. Registrants may reserve rooms at the Washington Hilton (1919 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20009) through the Annual Meeting portal at A guaranteed rate is available until March 16, 2022, beginning at $295.00 per night.

A3: Are meals included in the registration fee?
Meals are not included in the registration fee. Details about arrangements for the Hudson Medal and WILIG events will be provided to Annual Meeting attendees when available.

A4: Will Annual Meeting programs be available to in-person attendees for viewing after the meeting?
Yes. Keynotes, plenaries, and other selected sessions will be recorded. The recordings will be available on-demand exclusively to Annual Meeting registrants following the meeting before being made available to the public.

Virtual Access to the Annual Meeting

A5: What is included in the registration fee?
The registration fee includes livestream access to:

  • All keynote and plenary sessions
  • Selected substantive sessions (The list of all sessions that are included in the virtual package is posted at
  • Online social and networking sessions
  • Online professional development programs (available to Society members only)

A6: Will Annual Meeting programs be available to virtual attendees for viewing after the meeting?
Yes. Keynotes, plenaries, and other selected sessions will be recorded. The recordings will be available on-demand exclusively to Annual Meeting registrants following the meeting before being made available to the public.

Please see the Annual Meeting page for complete details of the activities provided under each registration option.

B1: How can I register?
Registration will be available online only, at If you are registering to attend in-person, you will need to complete the CrowdPass vaccine verification process before completing your registration.

B2: Can I register on-site?
No. There will be no on-site registration for the 2022 ASIL Annual Meeting.

B3: What is the registration deadline?
Registration will close at 5:30 pm ET on April 4, 2022.

B4: Where can I pick up my badge?
You will receive your badge upon check-in at the meeting. Your badge will be created using the name and affiliation information submitted through the online registration process. Check-in desks will be located in the Terrace Foyer next to the escalators and outside the entrance to the Columbia conference space.

B5: Is there an "early bird" discount?
Yes. Early bird registration is available until February 15, 2022. Any registrations received after that date will be at the regular conference rate.

B6: Is there a discounted rate for the Government, Non-governmental and International Organization attendees?
Yes. To receive the Government/NGO/IO rate, you must be a) a full-time employee of a U.S. or foreign government agency (federal, state, local or tribal) (government-supported universities or colleges, government contractors, and government consultants do not qualify); b) a full-time employee of a U.S. or foreign non-profit organization recognized by the United Nations; or c) a full-time employee of an organization designated by the President of the United States by Executive Order as qualified for privileges, exemptions, and immunities under the International Organizations Immunities Act.

B7: I believe I am entitled to a complimentary registration through an ASIL partner institution. If so, how do I register?
Please contact the ASIL representative at your institution for instructions on how to take advantage of the complimentary registration. If you need assistance in identifying your ASIL representative, please contact

B8: Do members of the media need to register?
Yes. Members of the media must register to be admitted to the Annual Meeting. Complimentary press registrations are available to those who meet ASIL's media accreditation guidelines. To request a complimentary press pass, please fill out the designated form on the Annual Meeting website by clicking "Press Registration." If you need assistance, contact

C1: What if I have to cancel my registration?
If you cancel on or before February 23, you may request a full refund, less a $25 processing fee, unless you wish to donate all or part of your refund. If you cancel after February 23 and on or before March 31, you may request a 50% refund, less a $25 processing fee, unless you wish to donate all or part of your refund.

No refunds will be available for cancellations made after March 31, 2022, unless you notify us that:
(a) You are unable to obtain a visa for entry into the United States; or
(b) You are prevented from attending the Annual Meeting due to Covid-related restrictions, such as travel or quarantine requirements.

All cancellation and refund requests should be directed to ASIL Services at

C2: Can I donate my refund to the Society?
Yes. Please notify ASIL Services at if you wish to make a tax-deductible donation to the Society in lieu of a refund.

C3: What if the Annual Meeting in person and it cannot take place in-person?
If the Annual Meeting cannot take place in-person, all sessions will take place virtually.

C4: If I was registered to attend in-person, what happens to my registration fee?
Your registration will be converted automatically to virtual access. You may choose to donate the difference in the registration fee to the Society or you may request a refund of that amount. If you do not wish to attend the virtual meeting and prefer to cancel your registration, you may donate the amount of your registration fee or request a full refund.

C5: Should I obtain travel insurance?
This is an individual decision, but given the uncertainties related to global travel you may wish to consider this option.

C6: Can I switch from in-person to virtual attendance?
Yes. You will be able to switch from in-person to virtual attendance without penalty until March 9, 2022 and will be entitled to a refund of the difference in the fee. Requests received after that date will be honored if received not later than 5:00 pm ET on March 31, 2022, but any difference in the fee will be nonrefundable (unless you qualify for an exception under the Cancellation Policy under C1 above.

C7: Can I switch from virtual to in-person attendance?
Yes. You will be able to switch from virtual to in-person attendance up until 5:00 pm ET on March 31, 2022. If you decide to attend in-person, you must pay the difference in the fee and complete the vaccine verification process described under Section D below.

C8: What happens to my hotel registration if I switch to virtual attendance?
You will need to cancel your room reservation with the hotel directly. You can find instructions on how to do so on the hotel's website.

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, we have instituted special procedures to protect in-person attendees. These provisions are described below.

D1: Do I need to be vaccinated to attend the ASIL Annual Meeting in person?
Yes. All persons who wish to register for the in-person 2022 ASIL Annual Meeting, including speakers, attendees, exhibitors, staff, guests, and vendors, will be required to provide proof that they are fully vaccinated. You must verify your vaccination status in advance of registration as described below.

D2: What does "fully-vaccinated" mean?
Annual Meeting registrants will be required to provide proof that they have received a full course of a World Health Organization (WHO)-approved vaccine plus, if eligible, a booster shot. Such measures must be completed not later than two weeks before the Annual Meeting.

In reaching this decision, we are guided by the best available medical advice regarding the dangers posed by the Omicron variant of Covid-19 and the measures necessary to lessen the likelihood of community spread at the Annual Meeting, as well as the potential for even a vaccinated individual to bring the virus home to family members who may be ineligible for a vaccine or have a pre-existing health condition.

D3: Will I be able to submit proof of vaccination when I arrive at the Annual Meeting?
No. Proof of vaccination must be provided in advance of the meeting as part of the registration process. It will not be possible to register or provide proof of vaccination on-site.

D4: If I do not wish to provide proof of vaccination, may I submit a negative test result instead?
No. We cannot accept a negative test result in lieu of proof of vaccination.

D5: Can I still participate in the Annual Meeting if I do not provide proof of vaccination?
If you are unable or unwilling to comply with the vaccination policy, we encourage you to register to attend virtually.

D6: How can I provide proof of vaccination?
ASIL is partnering with CrowdPass, a vaccine verification service, to verify vaccination status for attendees. You will be required to provide a copy of your CDC vaccination card or equivalent record of your Covid-19 vaccination history. The submission process is simple and secure and should take you only a couple of minutes to complete. All verifications will be processed within 48 hours and in most cases they are completed much more quickly. A step-by-step guide on how to submit your information via the CrowdPass portal is available on the Annual Meeting website. You will not be able to complete your Annual Meeting registration until you complete the CrowdPass vaccine verification process. [pin to specific tab on AM site]

D7: What if I have a question as to whether I meet the vaccination requirements?
Please contact the ASIL Member Services team at

D8: How long will my data be kept and who will have access to it?
The data collected for processing your vaccine verification will be accessible only to the compliance team at CrowdPass. The data will be retained only as long as necessary to verify your vaccine status. CrowdPass's full privacy policy is available online.

D9: I have already had Covid-19, and I would like to rely on natural immunity rather than being vaccinated. Is that a viable option?
No. Consistent with CDC guidance, we do not consider "natural immunity" based on prior Covid-19 infection to be the equivalent of vaccination.

D10: Will I need to wear a mask at the in-person meeting?
Yes. Annual Meeting attendees are required to wear a mask securely covering the nose and mouth at all times in shared indoor spaces, except when actively eating or drinking. We require use of a medical-grade disposable face mask, such as an N95 or KN95, or a surgical mask, rather than a cloth mask, which is not recommended to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant. If you do not have a mask that meets these requirements, one will be provided to you. If you refuse to comply with this requirement, you will be asked to leave the meeting.

D11: May I wear a cloth mask?
No. Cloth masks have been found to be ineffective in protecting against the risk of transmission of the Omicron variant.

D12: What will the seating arrangements be at the Annual Meeting?
Although it will not be possible to maintain full social distancing (i.e., 6 feet apart) at the conference, every effort will be made to maintain the greatest feasible distance between attendees at seated indoor events. For those who wish to maintain greater distance, breakout rooms for substantive Annual Meeting sessions will have designated areas set up to provide additional space between attendees, and we will offer a satellite room for plenary and keynote sessions with three feet between seats.

D13: What about receptions and lunches?
All receptions will be held outdoors, weather permitting. Food and beverage stations, reception tables, and seating areas will be arranged to provide as much open space and free air flow as possible. Masks are not required for outdoor receptions, but attendees who are more comfortable wearing a mask are encouraged to do so.

Details about arrangements for the Hudson Medal and WILIG events will be provided to Annual Meeting attendees when available.

D14: What if I test positive or am experiencing symptoms of Covid-19 in advance of the Annual Meeting?
Please do not come to the Annual Meeting if you test positive or are experiencing symptoms of Covid-19. Please contact and we will be happy to switch you to virtual attendance and to refund the difference in the registration fee.

D15: What if I test positive or am experiencing symptoms of Covid-19 after I arrive at the Annual Meeting?
Each morning during the Annual Meeting, you will be asked to complete an electronic health screening questionnaire before participating in Annual Meeting activities. If at any point during the Annual Meeting you are experiencing symptoms of Covid-19 or receive a positive test result, please leave the meeting or isolate in your room. Please contact and we will be happy to switch you to virtual attendance and to refund the difference in the registration fee.

D16: What Covid-19 precautions has the hotel taken?
We are working closely with the hotel to ensure it is taking all precautions to ensure the safety and comfort of Annual Meeting attendees. All hotel staff directly engaged in supporting the Annual Meeting will be following ASIL guidelines for attendees. The Hotel will be implementing the local health regulations put in place by the District of Columbia in portions of the hotel that are not being used for the ASIL Annual Meeting. These regulations will likely be less stringent than those in place for the Annual Meeting. Attendees should consider what precautions they should take when accessing common areas of the hotel space.

The Washington Hilton recently updated the hotel's air purification system. The new system utilizes MERV 13 filtration for all air handler units, as recommended by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) to help mitigate the transmission of infectious aerosols. The hotel also keeps its outside air dampers open 100% to facilitate air exchange.

D17: What are the local regulations regarding Covid-19 in the DC Metropolitan region?
You can find the local regulations governing Covid-19 at the following websites:

D18: Will the Annual Meeting be accessible?
The Society strives to ensure that the Annual Meeting is accessible to all attendees. If you need assistance to register or to participate in the 2022 Annual Meeting, please contact

The Washington Hilton is sensitive to the needs of individuals with disabilities and is in full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). For a list of features that are available for accessibility needs, please visit the hotel website, or contact the hotel directly at (202) 483-3000 if you have specific questions or need additional information.

All meeting levels of the 2022 Annual Meeting are wheelchair accessible and include direct elevator access. Every breakout room will have designated wheelchair spaces reserved directly off the main aisles with seating for support personnel as well.

If you need support to hear substantive sessions, please contact any member of the ASIL staff to request a hearing assistance device, which is supported by our on-site audio-visual company. If you are bringing your own hearing assistance device, please let us know in advance so we can ensure that our audio-visual services provider is prepared to support your equipment. The Society is unable to provide hearing assistance in spaces that do not have microphones for speakers, such as Interest Group business meetings.

Automated close captioning will be available to virtual participants. For information about how to access this service please contact

If you have additional requests for accessibility assistance, please contact as soon as you make your plans to attend so that we may work with you in advance to support your participation at the 2022 Annual Meeting.

E1: How will I access the virtual conference platform?
If you are a virtual attendee, you will receive dedicated communications about how to access the 2022 ASIL Annual Meeting virtual platform, including login information, in the week prior to the Annual Meeting.

E2: Will there be closed captioning for virtual sessions?
Yes, all virtual programs will include automated closed captioning.

E3: What if I have technical issues during the meeting?
If you have any technical questions or difficulties, use the "Help" button on the virtual Annual Meeting page to address the question to the technical staff member who is monitoring the session. The "Help" button can be found on every page of the Virtual Annual Meeting site, and there will be technical staff monitoring the Help channel throughout the Annual Meeting.

E4: Are the virtual sessions secure?
Access is restricted to registered attendees. You must use your registered email address and assigned password to enter the site. You are not permitted to share their password with any other individual.

Interference with the Annual Meeting, or with any user, host, or network, whether by sending a virus, overloading, spamming, mail-bombing, or by any other means, is strictly prohibited. Persons who interfere with the Annual Meeting will be removed from the conference immediately and will not be permitted to return.

F1: What are the expectations for attendee conduct at the Annual Meeting?
The Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law is a professional gathering of individuals interested in the study and practice of international law. As a global leader in advancing international law and justice, the Society is committed to ensuring its events promote a diverse, welcoming, and inclusive community that recognizes the inherent dignity and equality of all people.

The American Society of International Law prohibits discrimination, including discrimination based on age, citizenship, color, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity or expression, indigenous origin, marital status, nationality, national origin, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic or veteran status.

All attendees, including speakers, staff, exhibitors, and guests, are expected to conduct themselves with proper decorum and to respect the dignity of their fellow attendees. Disruptive or offensive behavior will not be permitted.

The Society does not tolerate discriminatory conduct or harassment in any form, whether verbal or non-verbal, in person or electronic, including derogatory or offensive language, intimidation, or unwanted physical contact.

F2: What should I do if I see or experience discriminatory conduct or harassment?
Allegations of misconduct should be reported to a member of the Society's staff at the registration desk or via email at The Society reserves the right to take any action it deems appropriate to address violations of these Guidelines, including by reporting the alleged misconduct to the individual's home institution, filing a police report, and removal and debarment from the Annual Meeting.

G1: Is CLE credit available for meeting sessions?
Yes, a number of the substantive panels at the ASIL Annual Meeting will be accredited for CLE. Sessions that are approved for CLE credit will be designated as such in the final program and in the meeting app. ASIL will obtain accreditation for all of the CLE sessions from California, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. New York attorneys can gain automatic approval for CLE credits from the Annual Meeting through the Approved Jurisdictions policy. Attorneys from states recognizing out-of-state CLE credits in compliance with MCLE standards can obtain reciprocity for credits earned at the Meeting, but each attendee is responsible for obtaining their own certification through their state board. ASIL will not submit on behalf of the attendee. There is a flat $75 fee for CLE registration for the Annual Meeting. You must include the CLE option during your registration to obtain the necessary credentials for CLE tracking.

G2: How do I get CLE documentation?
ASIL uses a "Sign in/Sign out" tracking system for reporting CLE requirements. Every session accredited for CLE will have volunteers stationed at the entrance and exits. Individuals wishing to obtain CLE for attending that session MUST give their ASIL Annual Meeting badge number to the volunteer and sign in/sign out. Only individuals who sign in AND sign out of a session will be awarded CLE credit. During the conference, if you realize you forgot to sign in/sign out of a session, you may stop by the ASIL CLE table with a colleague who can verify your attendance and sign in/sign out.

G3: Can ASIL still provide me with a Certificate of Attendance if I forgot to sign in/sign out?
No. State CLE reporting regulations prohibit ASIL from changing an attendance record after the event has ended, regardless of whether or not you can provide witnesses to your attendance.

G4: Can I receive partial credit?
Credit shall be awarded only for attendance at an entire session. No credit shall be awarded for attending a portion of a session. You must attend all of a single session to receive credit. If you sign out of one session and into another, you cannot receive any CLE credit for either of those sessions.

G5: How do I get CLE credit for virtual sessions?
ASIL is offering CLE credit for the live-streamed virtual sessions at the Annual Meeting. As with the in-person version of the meeting, you must register in advance to be eligible for CLE credit. At the end of each session, to document your attendance you will need to click on a button which will be visible on your webpage that says "CLE Documentation" to verify that you were present for the duration of the program. Partial credit will not be given.

G6: What should I do if I believe my Certificate of Attendance shows an incorrect CLE credit or contains a typo?
Contact the ASIL via e-mail at with the following:

  1. Your contact information (name, phone, e-mail, and address)
  2. The session title
  3. What you believe to be incorrect (my name is misspelled, etc.)

Providing ASIL with this information will allow us to respond back to you quickly. Please remember that ASIL may not change any sign in/sign out times after the Meeting has ended.

G7: How do I get my CLE certificate of attendance form?
Following the Meeting, ASIL will process all of the attendee records that contain scan in and scan out times for CLE sessions. ASIL will email every individual with a complete CLE record and ask for certain information (state(s) licensed, attorney id numbers, etc.) to be provided in an online survey form. Individuals who respond to that survey will receive their CLE certificate of attendance. Individuals who fail to respond to that survey will NOT receive their CLE certificates.

G8: Does my state require me to take continuing legal education courses?
In the United States, the vast majority of states require lawyers to take mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) courses in order to practice law. Find out about your state's MCLE requirements on the American Bar Association website

CLE written materials are available at registration upon request, and are included in the meeting app.