Review ReportReview ReportReview Report

35th Edition of the

Telders International Law

Moot Court Competition

Peace Palace, The Hague Peace Palace, The Hague Peace Palace, The Hague

262626---28 April 201228 April 201228 April 2012

page

FOREWORD Foreword by the Chairman of the Telders Supervisory Board 3 Members of the Supervisory Board 4 Telders Organizing Office 2012 4 Legacy of Professor Dr. B.M. Telders 5 National Rounds Teams 7 Participating Teams of the Semi-Finals 11 Sponsors Teams 17 International Board of Review 20 Judges of the Semi-Finals 24 Judges of the Final Round 26 Jury for the Best Oralist Award 28 Judge Assistants 29

REVIEWS University of Oslo 30 Leiden University 31 University of Tartu, Elise Nikonov 32 University of Tartu, Meris Velling 33 Sara Wyeth, Winner Best Oralist Award 34 Safi van ‘t Land, Runner-up Best Oralist Award 36 Prof. Steven Freeland, Best Judge Award 37

RESULTSAwards 40 Awards and Winners of the Telders Competition 2012 41 Final Results 2012 43 Acknowledgements / Sponsors 45

3

FOREWORD

by the Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Telders International Law Moot Court Competition

Thirty five years ago the very first Telders International Law Moot Court Competition was held. Teams from just three universities participated. This year 27 universities were represented, with preliminary rounds held in five countries. The teams from Denmark, Iceland, Italy and Turkey competed for the first time.

At the 35th edition of the Telders Moot Court Competition, the students pleaded The case of North Manconia, which involved various complicated issues of international law. This highly interesting case was written by Mr. David McKeever, Associate Legal Officer at the International Court of Justice.

The Supervisory Board and the Telders Organizing Office wish to express their gratitude to all sponsors which have pledged their support to the Competition in many different ways.

The Supervisory Board congratulates the winning teams, and thanks all the talented teams which have taken part in the Competition. The Board would also like to thank all the panellists, members of the International Board of Review as well as the members of the jury who donated their valuable time. They made the Telders Competition 2012 a most enjoyable event!

Judge Kenneth Keith Chairman

4

SUPERVISORY BOARD OF THE TELDERS INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT COURT FOUNDATION

H.E. Judge Kenneth Keith, International Court of Justice, Chairman of the Supervisory Board

H.E. Judge Abdul Koroma, International Court of Justice

H.E. Judge Peter Tomka, International Court of Justice

H.E. Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, International Court of Justice

Prof. Dr. John Dugard, Leiden University (emeritus)

Prof. Dr. Nico Schrijver, Leiden University

Prof. Dr. Liesbeth Lijnzaad, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maastricht University

Dr. Sam Muller, Director The Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law (HiiL)

Mrs. Hanna Thuránszky, Clifford Chance

Mr. Rolf Oosterloo LL.M, MA, MPA, Campus The Hague, Leiden University

Ms. Mette Léons, Telders Organizing Office

TELDERS ORGANIZING OFFICE 2012

Ms. Arlinda Rrustemi

Ms. Astrid de Vries

Ms. Mette Léons (Co-ordinator)

5

LEGACY OF PROFESSOR DR. B.M. TELDERS (1903-1945)

The Telders International Law Moot Court Competition is named after Professor Benjamin Marius Telders, who first became a professor of international law at Leiden University in 1931. Telders was extremely interested in why and how law operated. He considered international law to be a unique study and challenge, since it was— and in many respects still is— undefined and interwoven with history and politics. Professor Telders was respected for his sharp mind and frequently had the honour to represent his country, The Netherlands, before the Permanent Court of International Justice, predecessor of the International Court of Justice.

His interests and activities were not, however, limited to international law. Professor Telders was a man who enjoyed life to the full. He spent his time doing various other activities as playing the piano, editing a literary magazine and leading a political party. These other activities complemented his duties as a professor and a lawyer.

His approach to law was a practical one. Problems were meant to be solved, but not in contravention with important legal principles such as the rule of law and civil society. Professor Telders stood and fought for those principles even in the most difficult of times during the Second World War. Even being imprisoned for four and a half years did not break him morally or mentally, but made him more determined. He continued to write about international law, using a small pencil and match sticks. His fellow prisoners had great respect for his ability to put moral guidance and leadership into practice. Professor Telders died in the concentration camp of Bergen-Belsen in April 1945.

Two years later, in 1947, former students of Professor Telders founded the Telders Students Society of International Law (Telders Dispuut) in commemoration of their Professor. The first Telders International Law Moot Court Competition was organised in 1977 on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Telders Students Society for International Law.

Now, 35 years later after the first competition, the Telders Moot Court continues to maintain and live up to the legacy of the learned professor of international law.

015189x

Easy Ways to Order for the Americas 7 Write: Springer Order Department, PO Box 2485, Secaucus, NJ 07096-2485, USA 7 Call: (toll free) 1-800-SPRINGER 7 Fax: 1-201-348-45057 Email: orders-ny@springer.com or for outside the Americas 7 Write: Springer Customer Service Center GmbH, Haberstrasse 7, 69126 Heidelberg, Germany 7 Call: +49 (0) 6221-345-4301 7 Fax : +49 (0) 6221-345-4229 7 Email: orders-hd-individuals@springer.com 7 Prices are subject to change without notice. All prices are net prices.

springer.comABC

Highlighted Titles in Law from Springer and

T.M.C. Asser Press

7

NATIONAL ROUNDS TEAMS

EnglandUniversity of Reading Team Coach: Dr. James A. Green Team members: Mr. James Beechinor Ms. Nabila Kamarudin Ms. Tracy Tan Ms. Tenisha Trotman

Ireland The Law Society of Ireland Team coach: Ms. Eva Massa Team members: Ms. Sadhbh O’Sullivan Ms. Laura Cullinane Ms. Cecelia Joyce Ms. Yvonne Czajkowski

Malta The University of Malta Team members: Ms. Lara Cassar Mr. Timothy Borg Olivier Mr. Karl Tanti Mr. Thomas Bugeja

Romania Faculty of Law, University of Bucharest Team coach: Mr. Radu Serbanescu Team members: Ms. Lisa-Maria Achimescu Ms. Raluca Iuliana Luca Mr. Mihail-Andreas Mitoseriu Mr. Andrei Vladut Savu

West University of Timisoara Team coach: Mr. Lucian Bojin Team members: Ms. Diana Moise Ms. Pop Laura Ms. Mirela Lupu Mr. Corin Suta

8

Ukraine Academy of Advocacy of Ukraine Team coach: Ms. Olga Kalinina, Ms. Natalia Kelsh Team members: Mr. Abramovych Rodion Ms. Oleksandra Sologub Ms. Iulia Prudnyk Mr. Denys Medvediev

Uzhgorod National University Team coach: Mr. Dmitry Byelov Team members: Mr. Taras Babyak Mr. Georgy Volos Ms. Victorya Fizer Ms. Victorya Oros

International Humanitarian University Team coach: Mr. Andriy P. Levandovich Team members: Ms. Masha Sukhotina Mr. Yuriy Sachenko Mr. Rybalko Volodymyr

Kyiv International University Team coach: Ms. Alina Bezkorovayna Team members: Ms. Iryna Sudalenko Mr. Suren Petrosian Mr. Mark Prykhodko Ms. Tetiana Shevchenko

Ostroh Academy National University Team coach: Ms. Tetiana Khomych Team members: Ms. Tetiana Rodoman Ms. Inna Parkhomets Ms. Yuliya Ivasiv Ms. Oksana Mazuruk

Zaporizhzhya National University Team coach: Mr. Mykhailo Vikhliaiev Team members: Ms. Anna Turska Ms. Hanna Spiridonova Ms. Ruslana Filonenko Mr. Olexander Pidyash

9

Iven Franko National University of Lviv Team coach: Ms. Oksana Holovko-Havrysheva Team members: Mr. Sviatoslav Kustovinov Ms. Iryna Yelisyeyeva Ms. Anna Melnychuk

Ms. Liliya Hermanovych

Classic Private University Team coach: Ms. Nataliia Kovalenko Team members: Ms. Kateryna Bibro Ms. Oleksandra Gusieva Mr. Yaroslav Solodov

Ms. Ryma Sharaeva

Odessa National Maritime Academy Team coach: Ms. Svetlana Nemertsalova Team members: Mr. Konstantin Karaianov Ms. Anastasia Dyedkova Ms. Antonina Trikhmanenko

Ms. Oleksandra Novikova

National University ‘Odessa Academy of Law’ Team coach: Mr. Dmytro Koval Team members: Ms. Natalia Bogachenko Ms. Leila Zhdanova Ms. Anastasiia Melnyk

Mr. Oleksandr Dorofieiev

11

PARTICIPATING TEAMS SEMI-FINALS

Austria Vienna University

Team coaches: Ms. Jane A. Hofbauer Mr. Markus Beham Team members: Mr. Dominik Malicki

Ms. Viviane Arnolds Ms. Martina Gross Ms. Michaela Hinterholzer

Bulgaria Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”

Team coaches: Mr. Nickolay Mladenski Ms. Elisar Bashir

Team members: Ms. Desislava Valerieva Stamenova Mr. Malamir Dobromirov Malamov Ms. Milena Stefanova Dokova Ms. Neli Lyubenova Vladinova

Denmark University of Southern Denmark

Team coaches: Ms. Ulrike Barten Mr. Bugge Daniel

Team members: Ms. Trine Petersen Ms. Sina Petersen Mr. Nikolaj Hansen Mr. Patrick Hansen

EnglandUniversity College London

Team coaches: Mr. Joseph Markus Mr. Sam Bright

Team members: Ms. Abla O’Callaghan Ms. Iqra Musaddaq

Mr. Samuel Hawke Mr. Stuart Bruce

12

Estonia University of Tartu

Team coaches: Mr. Miiko Vainer Ms. Kärt Pormeister Team members: Ms. Elise Nikonov

Ms. Kairi Kaldoja Ms. Jaana Lints Ms. Meris Velling

Finland University of Helsinki

Team coach: Mr. Ukri Soirila Team members: Ms. Minna Anttonen

Ms. Justina Skyrelyte Ms. Heini Tuura

Mr. Tomas Garcia

France Institut Catholique de Lille - Faculté Liberté de Droit

Team coaches: Mr. Giuseppe-Matteo Vaccaro-Incisa Ms. Margot Colasse

Team members: Ms. Claire Duquesne Ms. Sophie Fournier Ms. Ata Iungu Ms. Claire-Naila Damamme

Georgia Tbilisi State University

Team coach: Ms. Tamar Gongadze Team members: Ms. Nino Khukhunaishvili

Ms. Mariam Bilikhodze Ms. Ana Mirianashvili Ms. Nino Grigolia

Germany Universität zu Köln

Team coach: Mr. André Gilles Team members: Ms. Anna Stojanov

Ms. Nora vom Brocke Ms. Lisa Hammelrath

Mr. Thomas Korn������������������������������������������������

13

Greece Democritus University of Thrace

Team coaches: Dr. Constantine Antonopoulos Mr. Dimitrios Batsalas Team members: Ms. Dimitra Fragkou Ms. Christina-Dimitra Chelioti Mr. Argyrios Papaefthimiou

Hungary Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE)

Team coaches: Mr. Bence Spiczmüller Ms. Zsófia Deli

Team members: Ms. Eszter Fodor Mr. Domokos Pásztor Mr. Zoltán Karácsonyi Ms. Blanka Börzsönyi

Iceland University of Akureyri

Team coaches: Mr. Andrés Már Magnússon Ms. Aðalheiður Ámundadóttir

Team members: Ms. Tiantian Zhang Mrs. Kolbrún Eva Ríkharðsdóttir Ms. Hjördís Olga Guðbrandsdóttir Mr. Ölvir Karlsson

Ireland The Honorable Society of King’s Inns

Team coach: Mr. Michael Connell Team members: Mr. Gearóid Murphy Ms. Mairead Smith

Mr. James Lawless Mr. Conor Burke

ItalyUniversity of Padua – Faculty of Law

Team coach: Ms. Eirin Larsen Team members: Mr. Giulio Cortesi Mr. Marco Bertacchi Ms. Elisa Spiller

Ms. Giulia Zanchetta

14

Latvia The University of Latvia

Team coach: Mr. Māris Lejnieks Team members: Ms. Zane Akermane

Mr. Dainis Pudelis Mr. Ivars Stankevics Mr. Artis Straupenieks

Lithuania Vilnius University

Team coach: Ms. Gintarė PažereckaitėTeam members: Ms. Ieva Matusevičiūtė

Mr. Tadas Varapnickas Mr. Virgilijus Pajaujis

Ms. Gintarė Taluntytė

Malta University of Malta

Team coach: Dr. Norman Martinez Team members: Ms. Kristina Miggiani

Mr. Michael Muscat Ms. Martine Farrugia

The Netherlands I The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Team coach: Dr. Michail Vagias Team members: Ms. Alexandra Baciu

Mr. Janos Ferencz Mr. Christopher Then Mr. Mihail Vatsov

The Netherlands II Leiden University

Team coaches: Dr. Erik V. Koppe Ms. Andrea Varga Team members: Ms. Maria Louise Piët Ms. Safi van ‘t Land Ms. Florentine Vos Ms. Sara Wyeth

15

Norway University of Oslo

Team coaches: Ms. Joanna Nicholson Mr. Marjan Ajevski Team members: Ms. Militsa Kostova Ms. Tamar Morchiladze Ms. Janne Haraldsen Ms. Synne Ellen Hathway

Portugal Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Team coach: Mr. Miguel Calado Moura Team members: Mr. Ricardo Dias Bastos Ms. Rita Cristina Guerreiro Teixeira

Mr. João Francisco Quaresma Barreiros Ms. Ana Isabel Cabral Lopes

Romania Universitatea “Petru Maior” Tîrgu Mureş

Team coach: Ms. Andrea Kajcsa Team members: Mr. Andrei Palade Mr. Raul Miron Ms. Luminiţa Gabura

Mr. Dumitru Cazac

Scotland University of Edinburgh

Team coach: Mr. Stephen Bailey Team members: Mr. Harry Skinner Ms. Anna-Maria Rehbinder Mr. Usman Waheed Ms. Anna Klaskala

SerbiaUniversity of Novi Sad

Team coach: Mr. Dusan KovacevicTeam members: Mr. Nemanja Galic

Ms. Bojana Apic Mr. David Gutesa Mr. Nikola Siljegovic

16

Switzerland University of St. Gallen

Team coach: Ms. Christa Stünzi Team members: Mr. Daniel Trusilo

Ms. Jeehae Jun Ms. Stefanie Geiger Ms. AnneCécile Vonlanthen

Turkey Istanbul University

Team coach: Mr. Engin Galip Şimşek Team members: Ms. Rengin Çimşitoğlu

Ms. Dilara Nur Cansu Ms. Elif Tan Mr. Ulaş Efendioğlu

Ukraine National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy”

Team coach: Ms. Kateryna Krakhmalova Team members: Ms. Kateryna Polishchuk

Mr. Andrii Moskaliuk Ms. Viktoriia Matsenko

Ms. Mariia Ulianovska

17

THE TELDERS ORGANIZING OFFICE WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS ITS GRATITUDE TO THE FOLLOWING ORGANISATIONS FOR SPONSORING THE TEAMS OF

Austria Brandl&Talos RA BKP – Brauneis Klauser Prändl RA CHSH – Cerha Hempel Spiegelfeld Hlawati RA DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach DSC – Doralt Seist Csoklich RA Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Galla Herget RA Heid Schiefer RA Hoffmann Sykora bhp RA Hornbanger Rechtsanwaltskanzlei KWR – Karasek Wietrzyk RA ÖNB – Österreichische Nationalbank PFR – Proksch Fritzsche RA RA Öhlböck SCWP Schindhelm – Saxinger Chalupsky & Partner RA GmbH Schoenherr Willheim│Müller RA WOLF THEISS RA Zöchbauer Frauenberger RA

Denmark Kammeradvokaten – Advokatfirmaet Poul Schmith

Estonia The University of Tartu Law Firm Borenius

Finland Roschier The Finnish Bar Association The Finnish Ministry of Justice

France Faculté Libre de Droit – Université Catholique de Lille – 60, boulevard Vauban – B.P. 109 – 59016 LILLE Cedex

Germany Kölner Gymnasial- und Stiftungsfonds Rechtsanwälte Kümmerlein, Simon & Partner, DLA Piper UK LLP, CMS Hasche Sigle Rechtsanwälte

Georgia Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

18

Iceland Menntamálaráðuneytið – Ministry of Education, Science and Culture FSHA – Student Union of the University of Akureyri IceGroup Eimskip SBAVÍS Slippurinn Ásprent Bjarg Miðlun fasteignir Deloitte Frost PactaBústólpi Arctic Portal

Latvia The University of Latvia

Lithuania Advocate Adomas LIUTVINSKAS Law firm TARK GRUNTE SUTKIENE Institute of International and European Law, Vilnius University Lithuanian Bar Association

The Netherlands II Leiden Law School

Norway Selmer Advokatfirma

Portugal Faculdade de Direito da Universidade Nova de LisboaEdições Almedina

Romania Fundația “Pro Iure” www.proiure.ro

Ukraine Risk Reduction Foundation: http://www.rr-f.ch/Ernst & Young LLC (Ukraine): www.ey.com

20

INTERNATIONAL BOARD OF REVIEW

The International Board of Review (IBOR) was composed of a panel of international experts trained in (international) law. The task of the IBOR was to assess the written memorials of the participating teams.

Austria Prof. Ursula Kriebaum, Institut für Europarecht, Internationales Recht und Rechtsvergleichung, Abteilung für Völkerrecht und Internationale Beziehungen, Universität Wien

Dr. Stephan Wittich, Institut für Europarecht, Internationales Recht und Rechtsvergleichung, Abteilung für Völkerrecht und Internationale Beziehungen, Universität Wien

Bulgaria Mr. Dinko Dinev, asst. lecturer, nominated by the Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski

Ms. Inna Uchkunova, asst. lecturer, nominated by the Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski

Denmark Dr. Jacques Hartmann, EIUC - European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation

England Mr. Thomas Liefländer, University of Oxford

Estonia Ms. Katre Luhamaa, mag. iur., nominated by the University of Tartu

Dr. Rene Värk, Lecturer of International Law, University of Tartu

Finland Mr. Kristian Wohlström, University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law

Mr. Paavo Kotiaho, Research Fellow, Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, University of Helsinki

France Ms. Dorothée Lobry, nominated by the Institut Catholique de Lille

Mr. Affef Ben Massour, nominated by the Institut Catholique de Lille

Georgia Mr. George Dvaladze, nominated by the Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

Ms. Maia Titberidze, nominated by the Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University

Germany Dr. iur. Dieter Fleck, Former Director for International Agreements & Policy, Federal Ministry of Defence, Germany

Dr. iur. Karin Oellers-Frahm, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law

21

Greece Dr. Charikleia Aroni, Researcher

Dr. Efthymios Papastavridis, nominated by the Democritus University of Thrace

Dr. Miltiadis Sarigiannidis, Faculty of Law, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Hungary Prof. Dr. Gábor Kardos, Eötvös Loránd University

Dr. Tamás Lattmann, Eötvös Loránd University

Iceland Dr. Rachael Lorna Johnstone, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Akureyri

Ireland Ms. Sarah-Jane Hillery, Barrister-at-Law, Law Library, Four Courts, Dublin

Italy Prof. Andrea Gattini, University of Padua

Latvia Ms. Katrine Plavina, nominated by the University of Latvia

Lithuania Ms. Indrė Isokaitė, Tarptautinės ir ES teisės institutas, Teisėsfakultetas

The Netherlands Mr. Ingo Venzke, Research Fellow and Lecturer at the Amsterdam Center for International Law, University of Amsterdam

Dr. Cedric Ryngaert, Lecturer in International Law at Utrecht University

Norway Dr. Kjetil Mujezinovic Larsen, Associate professor, Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law

Ms. Cecilie Hellestveit, LL.M., Legal Advisor, International Law and Policy Institute (ILPI)

Portugal Prof. Francisco Pereira Coutinho, Faculdade de Direito da Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Mr. Miguel Rodrigues Leal, LL.M., Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Scotland Ms. Kasey L. McCall-Smith, PhD candidate, School of Law, University of Edinburgh

Serbia Mr. Andrej Kalmar, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Law

Mr. Vladislav Djanic, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Law

22

Switzerland Ms. Fabienne Streit, MA HSG International Affairs, dipl. Wipäd

Ms. Hanna Bodenmann, B.A. HSG Law & Economics, Certificat de droit transnational Université de Genève

Turkey Ms. Verda Neslihan Akün, Research Assistant, Ph.D, Istanbul University, Faculty of Law

24

JUDGES SEMI-FINALS

The Judges who participated in the International Semi-Finals are highly qualified and well-trained professionals and academics of international law. The Judges work for various international courts and tribunals, international organisations, law firms, and academic institutions.

Ms. Claire Achmad, Research and Advocacy Officer, UNICEF the Netherlands, PhD Candidate, Leiden University

Dr. Philipp Ambach, International Criminal Court

Ms. Michaella Andrianasolo, Coalition for the International Criminal Court

Prof. Dr. Elisabeth Back Impallomeni, University of Padua

Dr. Freya Baetens, Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, Leiden University

Mr. Jan Bangert, Böckli Bodmer & Partner

Mr. E.E. van Bemmelen van Gent, Bynkershoek Institute/The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Anja Blank, Legal Adviser, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Captain Rieneke Buisman, Legal Advisor Ministry of Defence, Royal Netherlands Airforce

Dr. Andrea Carcano, Lecturer, UNICRI, Turin

Ms. Axelle Cartier, LL.M. (adv.), Excalibur Almaz Ltd., Joint Aviation Authorities – Training Organisation

Ms. Barbara Concolino, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Ms. Daniëlla Dam-de Jong, PhD Candidate, Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies

Professor Countess Ingrid Detter de Lupis Frankopan, Académie De Verrey

Mr. M.K. Eshragh, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

Mr. Neil Fishman, Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Prof. Steven Freeland, University of Western Sydney

Prof. Dr. Andrea Gattini, University of Padova

Mr. Matthew Gillett, The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

Dr. Suzanne Guèvremont, Researcher

Ms. Esther Hauser, Bezirksgericht Zürich (District Court of Zürich)

Mr. Nobuo Hayashi, Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO)/International University of Japan

25

Ms. Niamh Hayes, Irish Centre for Human Rights

Mr. Peter Henley, Norton Rose LLP

Prof. Dra. Maria del Angel Iglesias, UNIR, International University

Prof. Dr. Vladimír Kopal, Faculty of Law, West Bohemian University Pilsen

Dr. Werner Miguel Kühn, Court of Justice of the European Union

Prof. Pētur Dam Leifsson, University of Iceland, Faculty of Law

Prof. Liesbeth Lijnzaad, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maastricht University

Ms. Bridie McAsey, Legal Adviser to the President of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Dr. Martha Mejia-Kaiser, Co-Chair Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot Court Committee, IISL

Mr. Marko Divac Öberg, The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

Ms. Fraukje Panis, Lawyer at GMW Advocaten

Dr. Christophe Paulussen, T.M.C. Asser Institute

Dr. Hossein Piran, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Mr. Nicholas Procopenko, Capita Fiduciary S.A., Luxembourg,

Dr. Sohrab Rabiee, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Dr. Olivier Ribbelink, T.M.C. Asser Institute / Universiteit Utrecht

Prof. Dr. Cornelis Roelofsen, Utrecht University

Mr. Daniel J. Russell, Legal Consultant

Mr. Pubudu Sachithanandan, International Criminal Court

Ms. Nadia Sanchez, alumnus Advanced LL.M. Public International Law programme

Mr. Alexandros Sarris, Ph.D candidate in International Law, Leiden University

Ms. Fanny Schaus, alumnus Advanced LL.M. Public International Law programme

Dr. Attila Sipos, Honorary Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, ELTE University

Dr. Otto Spijkers, Utrecht University School of Law

Mr. William Worster, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Mr. Piet Willems, International Law consultant, former Assistant Professor University of Ghent���

Prof. Mia Wouters, University of Ghent, judge to the European Nuclear Energy Tribunal in Paris under the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency, off Counsel LVP Law

26

Mr. Ruben Zandvliet, Meijers PhD-Fellow, Leiden University

Ms. Laura Zuydgeest, Lawyer at GMW Advocaten

Dr. Gentian Zyberi, Part-time lecturer in international law at Amsterdam Centre forInternational Law, University of Amsterdam

�

JUDGES OF THE FINAL ROUND

H.E. Judge Kenneth Keith (President) International Court of Justice

H.E. Judge Christopher Greenwood International Court of Justice

H.E. Judge Leonid Skotnikov International Court of Justice

Helping to put knowledge into practice

Oxford University Press publishes a wide range of legal educational and reference materials as well as books for legal scholars and professionals, bridging the gap between study, professional training and practice.

� Undergraduate law and the GDLWe are the UK’s leading publisher of legal educational materials with an unrivalled choice of textbooks and online resources for today’s law students. Visit the website to keep track of new publishing and to � nd out about initiatives in place across law schools.

www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/law

www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/orc/law

� Vocational lawWe publish a wide range of resources for the vocational stage between undergraduate study and legal practice, including books and online products for the Legal Practice Course and the Bar Professional Training Course.

www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/law/vocational

� Professional and practitioner lawWritten with the practitioner in mind we publish a number of well-regarded specialist titles offering comprehensive coverage, relied on by busy professionals. The titles provide perceptive analysis of the relevant law and offer practical guidance on procedural issues.

www.oup.com/uk/law

� Law for scholars��ford University �ress is committed to publishing the � nest legal scholarship. �nalytical reference works continue to be a core part of our legal publishing, and important new works emerge as contemporary legal and regulatory challenges stretch the boundaries of legal thought and scholarship.

www.oup.com/uk/law

� Oxford Law OnlineOxford Law Online is a collection of online law resources covering a range of subjects including: competition law, public international law, international investment arbitration, and criminology and policing. �lso provided is a collection of over � scholarly law books within the highly regarded Oxford Scholarship Online.

www.oup.com/uk/online/law

� Oxford Law JournalsThe Law Collection from Oxford Journals provide an important resource for legal enquiry and research featuring articles of a consistently high quality by leading practising lawyers and academics. For more information and to view the complete list of Oxford law jourals visit our website.

www.oxfordjournals.org/law

�

28

JURY FOR THE BEST ORALIST AWARD

The winner and runner-up of the Best Oralist Award were determined by the Judges of the Semi-Finals and the following members of the Jury:

Mr. Araz Alasgarov, LL.M. (adv) Public International Law student – Leiden University

Mr. Jonathan van Blaaderen, LL.M. student University of Amsterdam, Paralegal De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek

Mr. Martin Browne, LL.M. (adv) Public International Law student – Leiden University

Ms. Viorela Bubau, LL.M. Public International Law student, Leiden University

Ms. Fanny Declercq, LL.M. (adv) Public International Law student, Leiden University

Ms. Yao Fan, LL.M. (adv) European and International Business Law, Leiden University

Ms. Reka Hollos, LL.M. Public International Law student, Leiden University

Ms. Nadia Iskoussova, PhD candidate, Leiden University

Ms. Vasiliki P. Karzi, LL.M. Public International Law student, Leiden University

Ms. Laura Luca, International and European Law program, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Mr. Laurens Mol, alumnus student Leiden University

Ms. Iona Moraru, International and European Law program, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Herwinda Adhestya Natawijaya, LL.M. (adv) European and International Business Law, Leiden University

Mr. Sebestyen Pater, LL.M. (adv) Air and Space Law student – Leiden University

Ms. Magdalena Rząca, President of International Law Students Association University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski in Warsaw

Ms. Mélanie Thellier, LL.M. Public International Law student, Leiden University

Ms. Madeleine Timmermans, LL.B. student, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Anna Trocka, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

29

JUDGE ASSISTANTS

The following Law Students acted as Time Keepers and Judge Assistants during the court sessions of the international Semi-Finals:

Ms. Svetlana Atanasova, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Jolanta Biskina, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Shirleen Chin, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Mr. Theodoros Deligiannakis, Leiden University

Mr. Bart Dubbelman, Leiden University

Ms. Elisabeth Janssen, Leiden University

Ms. Magdalena Kwiatkowska, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

Ms. Patrycja Leszczuk, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

Mr. Michal Makarewicz, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

Ms. Patricia van Polanen Petel, Leiden University

Ms. Susanne Roodhuyzen, Leiden University

Ms. Aleksandra Serafin, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

Ms. Bethany Singer-Baefsky, Leiden University

Ms. Dragana Stanković, Leiden University

Ms. Desislava Velikova, The Hague University of Applied Sciences

Ms. Sylwia Patrycja Zwolan, University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw

30

REVIEWS

THE UNIVERSITY OF OSLOWinning Team of the Final Round

The Competition The Telders international moot court is an excellent opportunity to meet law students from all over Europe. We were excited to meet others who had also spent the last 8 months with Mr Neville. Although the time-schedule of the semi-finals is very demanding, there is still time for socialising. The evening arrangements were a welcome reminder that the competition is meant to be a fun experience after all the months of hard work.

Preparation From October we began to understand the case and research different legal issues. Throughout this process we worked as a team, meeting regularly and exchanging legal arguments. Having delayed the writing a little too long, Mr Neville played a big part in all our Christmases and it was a big relief to finally submit the document. From January we moved on to the oral preparations. This was probably the biggest challenge for all of us, but it was motivating to observe how each of us gradually improved from the initial phase.

The Finals On completing the semi-finals we felt a strong sense of accomplishment and were excited to celebrate this with the other teams at the announcement ceremony. Oslo University being a fairly new participant in the Telders competition, it was a great surprise hear our names called for the finals. The excitement was quickly followed by the realisation that we had a long night of preparation ahead of us. We woke Saturday morning with the daunting prospect of facing the ICJ judges at the final round and the formidable UCL team. For the first time we were going to say ‘may it please the honourable court’ and really mean it. It was an incredible experience for the whole team to stand up to this pressure and succeed.

From the Oslo university team, we would like to thank all those who organised this event for making the experience possible and to encourage others to get involved.

31

LEIDEN UNIVERSITY Winner of the Max Huber Award for the Best Overall Team / Winner of the Best Applicant

Oral Argumentation Award

Participating in the Telders International Law Moot Court Competition 2012 was a tremendously exciting experience from beginning to end. It all started when we were selected early in September 2011. As in previous years, the 2012 team was comprised of four students from the Leiden University Public International Law LL.M course: Sara Wyeth, Mariel Piët, Safi van ‘t Land and Florentine Vos. Having heard of the long-standing and impressive reputation Leiden enjoys at Telders, we anticipated the coming months with excitement and no small measure of trepidation.

In trying to determine what made our time in the Telders moot court team unforgettable, we must first and foremost mention our two wonderful coaches: Erik Koppe and Andrea Varga. Without them, the experience would neither have been as successful, nor fun. For although it was no small task to take up the Leiden mantel, with the help of our coaches (and a little poedersuiker!) we had a fantastic time.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. First, following selection, in the weeks after the case had just been published, we met regularly to research and debate the issues. With the deadline approaching we locked ourselves into a room in the law faculty, only emerging for take-out and very short periods of sleep (and if you have a long haul flight to Kenya, the night before the deadline you can forget sleep altogether!) Version after version we drafted, and redrafted. Only to notice when we finally had the last version in our hands, our formatting had suddenly changed again!

After a short break for exams, we started working on preparing for the oral rounds. Our coaches took no mercy on us at our first trial session. Confronted by a cross-fire of questions, we quickly realised how much more we would have to research and learn by heart in order to succeed. (“I mean...its not like they came in all guns blazing...”) Thus, more research, but above all a lot of practice sessions followed. Helped by many whom were all kind enough to act as guest judges: from previous Telders moot court teams and faculty members to friends, we worked day and night to rid ourselves of all our mistakes and prolific ‘uhms’. More drastic measures were needed, namely video analysis, to try to eradicate all those small twitches we showed while pleading (and to stave off the return of Thatcher!) We were even fortunate enough to attend a session of the International Court of Justice to see how it was really done.

Well rehearsed and ready to plead ourselves, we arrived at the Peace Palace for the start of the Telders competition. Every judge and every pleading session is unique, yet we felt confident that our extensive preparation would still our nerves, or at least so we hoped. Nevertheless we couldn’t help the adrenaline rushing through us when it was time to walk up to that stage. We plead our hearts out, argued our cases as best as we could and hoped for the best. In the end, we were very happy all our hard work and training paid off! We are all proud of the tremendous efforts and the dedication of our team, and not to forget the friendships and experiences we picked up along the way.

32

UNIVERSITY OF TARTUWinner of The Award for the Best Oral Argumentation for the Respondent

I just finished reading the previous edition of Telders Review Report and felt a sense of warmth and fellow feeling. It is comforting to think that there are so many people out there with whom we share the experience of staying up late in the nights, worrying about the fate of fictional characters and fantasy lands, and spending months trying to figure out how to best defend them in the court of law. With all the 2012 participants we have an even more nuanced common world of Mr Neville and RNM and USM and UJ. And then, of course, there is the unique story of every team and every individual participant. In my story, the main characters are an armchair by the window, a laptop, my co-Respondent Meris, and the 3-hour-long bus rides I had to take to see any of my teammates. The main themes are despair and exhilaration. Here we go.

At the beginning, I googled all the keywords I could come up with, read countless articles and copy-pasted anything worthwhile to my ever-evolving (and ever-becoming-even-more-messy) Grand Word File of Telders. It was fun. The fun stopped when the deadline for Draft 1 came so close that it was simply not possible to evade the daunting task of writing any more. All the legal issues felt ungraspable. It was all so overwhelmingly messy and confusing and complicated.

I had a hard time understanding and embracing the framework we were expected to operate in. When I read about universal jurisdiction and immunity, I took it all very much to heart. Although I did know it in theory, it was extremely difficult for me to truly accept that in international law, there is no such argument as „it is the right thing to do“. Slowly and painfully, I learned to keep my idealism apart from my argumentation. And slowly and painfully, I learned to take it as a game.

A week before the deadline of written memorials me and Meris found ourselves camping in her sister’s apartment. While our adorable Applicant teammates Kairi and Jaana were going over all the commas in their very final version, we read new articles and restructured and restructured our argumentation. We had heated discussions about the issues, we had intellectual exaltation when finally something made real sense, we had hours-long walks in the middle of the night in the snowy Tartu, we had confiding talks, we had personal dramas, we had laughter and we had fun. But all the new (and finally good) ideas materialised too slowly. There was not enough time. Everything we had written down, with credible sources, seemed so wrong, so illogical, so insufficient. At one point we felt so desperate and helpless that we seriously considered leaving it all and running away to Africa. But we did not. We somehow made it. In the end, our text was abundant with linguistical deficiencies and one of our footnotes was in Estonian. But we did manage to mail our memorial in time.

It was at the luscious dinner the first day in the Hague when I declared that all the pain I had put myself through because of Telders had finally paid off. After that, there was no more pain to come, just measureless pleasure. I meditated in the astonishingly beautiful garden of the Peace Palace. I smiled from the heart. I spoke from the heart. I enjoyed every second of my pleadings.

Elise Nikonov University of Tartu

33

It was my birthday when I received an e-mail confirming that I had been chosen to be a member of the new Telders Moot Court Competition team. At that moment I thought it was the best birthday gift ever. And it was. Participating in the competition has been a great experience and the most rewarding, memorable and enjoyable aspect of my legal studies due date. But, it was more time-consuming than I could have ever imagined and the effort that the preparations required was beyond expectations.

So this is how our preparations proceeded. After our first meeting we headed straight to the library and came back home with couple of heavy books about international law. Yes, I did start to read them straight away, as the enthusiasm towards challenging myself in such a prestigious competition seemed endless. During our next meetings we discussed general topics concerning international law. As we had had only one course about international law, there was much to discover. I was anxious when the case was released. Only this time I didn’t realise that I would spend endless sleepless nights reading countless articles about universal jurisdiction, immunity and genocide while trying to find the best arguments. Suddenly the library became our second home. Without even realizing, Telders had consumed us. At first you dedicate all your free time to it, then you pilfer a bit from the resources you are supposed to leave for the usual studies and finally you find yourself not sleeping properly.

The next six months our team came together at least once in a week. Some of the meetings lasted the whole day and most of them were held at the weekends. Teammates become your best friends and you really learn to trust them. As they are going through the same difficulties, you should really let them know your thoughts and feelings. The best way to avoid any stress is to stick together. If one of us got tired or felt lost, there was always someone, who had enough energy to encourage others to keep on going. Although our discussions concerning the arguments and the structure of the written memorials were sometimes quite fiery, we always found a way to agree on everything. And suddenly I realized that irrespective of the hard work, I do enjoy the whole process.

There were times, when we were seriously struggling with the deadlines. To finish the first draft on time, I had to move in to my teammate’s home. We had 5 intense working days with only couple of hours of sleep. But it was fun. We stocked up enough chocolate and energy drinks to support our long and in depth discussions about international law in general and the principles we wanted to base our arguments on. As a result, we ended up with pages of handwritten schemes and our very first memorial. Although the arguments were about to be rewritten and deleted another thousand times, we were pleased with ourselves. We were able to overcome every obstacle with a positive attitude driven by the knowledge that at the end we would be awarded with the opportunity to visit the centre of international law - the Hague.

The trip to the Hague was something we had been waiting for such a long time. During our flight we were still going through the cases; still trying to find the ultimate argument and prepare ourselves for every possible question. The first meeting at the Peace Palace was energizing. The glorious environment, the friendliness of the organizers, the support from our coach and the excitement of meeting the judges and other teams was the perfect award for all the hard work we had done so far. Suddenly, I didn’t feel nervous any more. The experience itself was so valuable that achieving a good result became a secondary goal. Finally it was all about doing what you love, being who you are, showing what you know and giving passionately 100% of yourself. With those thoughts I managed to stay calm while pleading before the court – a challenge that seemed so frightening couple of months ago. Thank you everybody, who supported me on the journey!

Meris Velling University of Tartu

34

SARA WYETH, LEIDEN UNIVERSITYWinner Best Oralist Award

It was a pleasure and an honour to be a part of the Telders 2012. There were highs and lows, stresses and laughs throughout the process that brought the Leiden Telders Team 2012 from initial selection to success at the competition. I thoroughly enjoyed working hard and playing hard(er) during the competition within the impressive surroundings of the International Court of Justice and Den Haag.

I must highlight, that I could not have taken home the prestigious Best Oralist award if it were not for my fellow team members. Miss Mariel Piet was a great co-agent, offering support and critique (heinous!) at the right moments. Miss Safi Van't Land and Miss Florentine Vos were formidable opponents to train against (just look at their awards!), at each practice session they tested and improved my own skills. It was a delight to work with, learn with and learn from these ladies during the Telders process. (PRIMA!)

It would be remiss if I did not mention my coaches Dr Erik Koppe and Andrea Varga. I prepared for the competition under their careful patience, encouragement and extraordinary demand for legal, factual and grammatical accuracy which made my performance and Telders experience all the better.

If I were to say anything to future Telders competitors then it would be that the starting point is hard graft - thorough preparation is the key to success. If you mix that with a good team, ambition and luck then the Telders experience may be one of the best things you do during your academic career. Thank you to the staff at Leiden University, the TOO and most of all my teammates, or rather friends, which made that the case for me.

Male captus bene detentus? Surrendering suspects to the International Criminal Court

CHRISTOPHE PAULUSSEN

2010 | ISBN 978-94-000-0100-8 | xvii + 1195 pp. | 129 euro | 123 GB pound | 181 US dollar | paperback

School of Human Rights Research Series, volume 41 Series price: 109.65 euro | 104 GB pound | 154 US dollar

‘True to the aims of the study, Christophe Paulussen provides a comprehensive assessment of the subject which will prove a useful tool for scholars and judges alike. The author’s authoritative command of the area is evinced by his ability to draw from an extensive list of material in support of arguments and theories. Although Paulussen was unable to provide a definitive answer to the central question, the book represents an important contribution to this field of literature and in the words of the author the real value of this study will be found […] in its elaborate and more timeless corpus, in its effort to position the complex male captus topic into the equally intricate ICC context. […] it is a highly recommended text.’

Helen McDermott in 2011 Criminal Law Forum

The infamous abduction of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina on 11 May 1960 and the recent kidnapping of suspected terrorist Abu Omar in Italy on 17 June 2003 show that the use of irregular means was and is still considered an option in apprehending suspects, especially when the interests are (considered to be) strong.

Since the International Criminal Court (ICC) also has to deal with suspects of serious crimes, one wonders what the position of this Court, arguably the most important institution in the field of international criminal justice, is towards suspects who claim that the way they were brought into the Court’s jurisdiction was irregular (male captus).

Basically, does it opt – taking into account, of course, that much will depend on the exact circumstances of the case – for effectiveness (in the sense of achieving prosecutions and convictions) and will it continue to exercise its jurisdiction notwithstanding the male captus (male captus bene detentus) or is it of the opinion that values such as fairness, human rights and the integrity of its proceedings demand that in the case of a male captus, the exercise of jurisdiction must be refused (male captus male detentus/ex iniuria ius non oritur)?

This study’s central question is how the ICC currently copes with the dilemmas that a male captus case can give rise to and how this approach is to be assessed. For this purpose, the author creates two evaluative frameworks; an external one (to find out how similar or different the ICC male captus position is to the position of other courts that have dealt with this problem before) and an internal one (to find out how the ICC position is to be assessed in relation to its own law).

Besides answering this specific central question, this study more generally combines two fascinating subjects which have not previously been put together in one book: the ICC and the much-debated male captus bene detentus maxim. Moreover, it makes a contribution to the male captus discussion itself, to the discussion as to how ICC judges and judges in general can best deal with alleged irregularities in the pre-trial phase of their case, to the discussion on how proceedings can be achieved which are considered both effective and fair.

Order Now! �Please send this form in a sufficiently

stamped envelope to Intersentia Groenstraat 31 | BE-2640 Mortsel | Belgium

� Or fax this form to +32 3 658 71 21 @ Or send a message to

mail@intersentia.be

ORDER FORM � For more information, please call +32 (0) 3 680 15 50

�� YES, I would like to order ..… copy(ies) of Male captus bene detentus? (ISBN 978-94-000-0100-8) at 94 euro per copy (shipping costs excl.)

Please charge my credit card: � Visa � MasterCard

name of cardholder: ........................ ....................................................... card number:................................... expiry date: ..................................... date: ............................................... signature:

Mr | Mrs | Ms

first name:name:

company:

street: no.:

postal code: city:

country:

tel: fax:

email: VAT no.:

date: signature:

g

‘T‘Truruee toto t thehe a aimimss ofof t thehe s stutudydy,, ChChririststopophehe P Pauaulusseh i t f th bj t hi h

36

SAFI VAN ‘T LAND, LEIDEN UNIVERSITYRunner-up Best Oralist Award

Participating in the Telders International Moot Court Competition 2012 was an absolutely fantastic experience and it was an honour to represent Leiden University in doing so. However, and well aware of the risk that this is likely to sound utterly cliché, the greatest honour was being part of such an incredible team of individuals. The countless hours we spent together, researching, drafting, discussing, redrafting, pleading, freaking out, calming each other down, laughing, researching, and pleading again, definitely make up some of my fondest memories of this past year.

The skills that we developed, the knowledge we gained and the bond we created along the way are invaluable. Winning the Runner-up Best Oralist Award therefore, was really the icing on the cake. I could not have done so without my co-agent Florentine Vos of course, with whom I share the pleasure of winning the ‘Best Oral Argumentation on Behalf of the Applicant Award’. An ever-cheerful walking-encyclopaedia, she offered me great wisdom, laughs and support throughout the months of preparation, and ultimately so on those two crucial days at the Peace Palace in The Hague.

Our respondents, Sara Wyeth and Mariel Piet, were formidable ‘opponents’, who pushed us to develop the strongest arguments for our case – which, when you are defending a man like Mr. Neville, is not necessarily always an easy task. I think Sara, winner of the Best Oralist Award, deserves a special mention here, as she certainly was the finest example I could have had, and much to my excitement, was also the source of a (partial) comeback to my British accent.

The immeasurable support, guidance and patience of our coaches Erik Koppe and Andrea Varga were key to my, or more accurately our success. We could not have asked for better mentors, and their confidence in us pushed us to get the best out of ourselves.

Finally, I thoroughly enjoyed the interaction with the judges on the day, both during the pleadings and afterwards. Their approving nods, challenging questions and sometimes inquisitive glances were a delight and certainly provided additional motivation. That said, I don’t think I would have had half the confidence if it had not been for the time and contributions of our guest judges – thank you!

37

PROF. STEVEN FREELANDWinner of the Best Judge Award

Late April every year is always a special time for me, and this year was, once again, no exception. From 26-28 April 2012, I had the great honour of participating as one of the Judges of the semi-finals of the 35th Edition of the Telders International Law Moot Court Competition in the Peace Palace at The Hague. This was my 8th year of judging in the Competition (time really does fly when you are having fun) – although, compared to some other Judges who have gladly returned year after year to play their part, I am by no means a ‘veteran’.

My experience at Telders this year was, as it always has been, a lot of fun. This was not only due to the wonderful hospitality and typically (although not so much this year) pleasant weather that The Hague traditionally offers each year for the Competition. The Telders Competition is a highly prestigious and widely supported event. The standard of the student presentations is second to none and, if anything, is getting even better every year, and it is always a pleasure to be involved and to be struck by the great expertise and diligence displayed by all participants.

The 2012 Competition involved oral pleadings by 27 teams from Universities in 26 European countries, each arguing the legal position in a complex and interesting fictional dispute, The Case of North Manconia, between the States of The Republic of North Manconia and The United States of Merseystan. The fact that so many Universities, and their students, coaches and Faculty Advisors are prepared to devote the time, resources and energy towards participation, is a testament to the high regard with which the Competition is held.

From the moment I arrived for the Judges’ welcome dinner on the Wednesday night, we were all treated to wonderful hospitality by the Telders Organizing Office, lead once more by the amazing Mette Leons. This remained the case throughout the Competition. It is always a pleasure to participate in such a well-organised and friendly atmosphere, where nothing was too much trouble for the organisers – something that was clearly felt and greatly appreciated by all of the other Judges as well as the participating students.

Not only were the students from a diverse range of countries – the Judges for the semi-finals themselves came from all parts of mainland Europe, as well as such far-flung places as Iceland and Australia. Moreover, the Judges came with a vast array of experience – they included (real) Judges, Lawyers, Government Ministry and Industry Legal Officers, officials in various UN and IGO bodies, University academics and other professionals.

All of this added further to the richness of the whole experience, not only for the students, but also for all of the Judges. It was, for example, a wonderful experience for all concerned to be involved in a moot between teams from Estonia and Norway (the eventual winner of the Competition final), with Judges being an Australian University Academic, an in-house legal Counsel from the European Court of Justice, and the General Counsel of a Space Tourism Entrepreneur based in the USA/Netherlands! This mix of culture, experience and legal training contributed to the very stimulating discussions that arose both during and after the formal mooting competition.

It was also interesting to see the different styles of mooting. As someone who has primarily worked and practiced in common law jurisdictions, it was particularly stimulating for me to observe the advocacy skills of students who are, in the main, educated in a civil law system. At times the moots may have seemed somewhat ‘adversarial’ in nature, but all students were able to adapt very well to the different procedural nuances of the Judges involved. Despite some differences in approach, it was heartening to see how seamlessly students and Judges

38

alike from differing legal systems could find a commonality of legal language, logic, argumentation and, above all, communication in a court-like situation.

Indeed, this is increasingly necessary and appropriate in the context of the growing number of international legal tribunals that have been established, which typically comprise Judges from all legal systems of the world and whose rules of evidence and procedure represent an ‘amalgam’ of different concepts from each system. The expertise that the students develop in preparing for, and participating in, the Competition augurs well for the ongoing development of an international legal bar, as well as for the next generation of international law Judges.

In this regard, international moots such as the Telders Competition, particularly where the students are exposed to Judges and other teams from a variety of legal systems and jurisdictions, provide budding international lawyers with excellent training and experience that will be essential for them to deal with the inevitable legal challenges of the 21st Century. The Competition is a wonderful way to educate young lawyers to work effectively in a globalising legal environment and to cope with the convergence of legal principles.

The performance of all the teams was exemplary, particularly when one realises that, for many of them, the language of the Competition (English) is not their first language. Not only did this not seem to present any significant problems, but it was obvious that the students had been very well trained by their respective Faculty Advisors to properly address the sometimes demanding rules of court etiquette, some of which might be quite different from those that exist in their home jurisdiction.

And what an amazing honour it was for the students to have such a distinguished panel of Judges for the final of the Competition – Judges Keith, Skotnikov and Greenwood from the International Court of Justice - and for the Competition itself to be held at the grounds of the Peace Palace. The presence and active contribution of these esteemed Judges added greatly to the prestige of the occasion and provided a further opportunity for the students to learn from the whole experience. The support that the International Court of Justice provides to the Competition is unique.

Another outstanding feature of the Competition was the spirit in which it was conducted. There have been occasions in other mooting competitions where the urge to ‘win’ has sometimes been overwhelming. The Telders Competition is different – naturally every team was determined to give its best, but it was apparent that the most important aspect of the Competition for the students was that they had the honour of playing a part in this most prestigious event. Every team was extremely gracious and accepted the sometimes difficult questions asked of them by the Judges in a good spirit and with due respect. They were also very courteous and friendly to their ‘opponents’ in the court room, and no doubt there was much laughter away from the formalities.

Indeed, outside of the formal moots, the various social events associated with the Competition were interesting and allowed everyone involved to exchange views, discuss the finer points of law, learn about each other’s countries and just have some fun!

So, overall, the 2012 Telders Competition was an outstanding success. I know that I speak for all of the Judges in saying that it was a great honour and pleasure to be involved in this Competition. I am sure that each of the Judges would be delighted to have the opportunity to be involved again in the future, and I personally look forward to many more years of association with the Competition.

May I also take this opportunity, on behalf of the Judges, to wish all of the participating students every success in their future studies and careers, to thank all of the sponsors of the

39

Competition and to thank again all those in the Telders Organizing Office, and everyone else associated with this wonderful event, whose efforts made this an unforgettable experience.

See you again in 2013!

Steven Freeland Professor of International Law University of Western Sydney, Australia

40

AWARDS

The teams and individual students competing in the Competition may win several awards. The teams advancing to the Finals are those with the highest total score - the score for the memorials and for the pleadings - for the Applicant State, on the one hand, and for the Respondent State, on the other hand. The winning team takes the Telders Trophy back home. The President of the Final Bench, H.E. Judge Keith, presented the Telders Trophy to the winning team of the Final Round of the Telders Competition 2012.

The Embassy of Switzerland in The Hague sponsors the Max Huber Award for the Highest Overall Score. The highest overall score is awarded to the team who has the highest score of both the Applicant and Respondent sides. The Max Huber Award 2012 was presented by Mr. Philippe Brandt, Minister-Counselor at the Embassy of Switzerland in The Hague.

The Carnegie Foundation Awards are presented to the teams which have written the Best Memorial for the Applicant and the Best Memorial for the Respondent. The awards were presented by Mr. Steven van Hoogstraten, Director of the Carnegie Foundation.

The Awards for the Best Oral Argumentation on behalf of the Applicant and on behalf of the Respondent were presented by the Case Author, Mr. David McKeever, Associate Legal Officer at the International Court of Justice.

One student is named the Best Oralist, an award for the best presentation of the oral pleadings. The Jury of the Best Oralist also nominates a runner-up. Both Best Oralist Awards were presented by the president of the Jury, Ms. Anna Trocka from the University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, Warsaw.

The Telders Award for Outstanding Team Effort was presented by Mr. Gerlof Bierma, President of the Prof. Mr B.M. Telders Society for International Law. This Award was initiated by the cooperation between the Telders Organizing Office and the Telders Society and awarded the first time in 2006.

The Best Judge Award was spontaneously created by students in 2003 to the best Judge of the Semi-Finals. The Best Judge Award 2012 was presented by a representative from the participating students.

41

AWARDS AND WINNERS OF THE TELDERS COMPETITION 2012

WINNER OF THE FINAL ROUNDUniversity of Oslo, Norway

FINALIST TEAMUniversity College London, England

THE MAX HUBER AWARD FOR BEST OVERALL SCORELeiden University, the Netherlands

THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION AWARD FOR BEST MEMORIAL FOR THE APPLICANTUniversity College London, England

THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION AWARD FOR BEST MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT(ex aequo)

Universitatea “Petru Maior” Tîrgu Mureş, Romania The University of Edinburgh, Scotland

THE AWARD FOR THE BEST ORAL ARGUMENTATION FOR THE APPLICANTLeiden University, the Netherlands

THE AWARD FOR THE BEST ORAL ARGUMENTATION FOR THE RESPONDENTUniversity of Tartu, Estonia

THE BEST ORALIST AWARD Ms. Sara Wyeth, Leiden University

THE RUNNER-UP BEST ORALIST AWARD Ms. Safi van ‘t Land, Leiden University

BEST JUDGE AWARDProf. Steven Freeland

THE TELDERS AWARD FOR OUTSTANDING TEAM EFFORTIstanbul University, Turkey

www.gmw.nl/enwww.legalexpatdesk.nl

The GMW Lawyers look forward to an excellent

competition in our city The Hague and wish all

of the participants a challenging experience!

GMW Advocaten

Scheveningseweg 52

P.O. Box 85563

2508 CG The Hague

Telephone +31 (0)70 361 50 48

Fax +31 (0)70 361 54 00

E-mail info@gmw.nl

a prominent law firm

with an international focus

and personal service for

entrepreneurs

foreign entities

expatriates

43

FINAL RESULTS 2012

Final Scores A Final Scores B Total Total

COUNTRY

TOTAL SCORE A (M+O)

RANKING A (M+O) COUNTRY

TOTAL SCORE B (M+O)

RANKING B (M+O)

Switzerland 255 14 Switzerland 250.5 15 Finland 253 15 Finland 251.5 14 Denmark 235.5 24 Denmark 243 19 Italy 264.5 7 Italy 257 9 Portugal 236.5 23 Portugal 241 20 Austria 273.5 3 Austria 264.5 6 Serbia 247.5 19 Serbia 223.25 27 NL-HHS 261.5 11 NL-HHS 245 17 Romania 271 4 Romania 257 9 Ireland 253 15 Ireland 255.5 13 Ukraine 258.25 13 Ukraine 233.5 24 Greece 263.5 9 Greece 269.5 4 Scotland 263.5 9 Scotland 270 3 England 265.5 6 England 275.5 1 Norway 275 1 Norway 261.5 7 Turkey 209.5 27 Turkey 225.5 26 Lithuania 242 22 Lithuania 226 25 Georgia 264.5 7 Georgia 239 22 Germany 243 21 Germany 256.5 11 France 230 25 France 235 23 Malta 248.5 18 Malta 247.5 16 NL-Leiden 268.5 5 NL-Leiden 273.5 2 Latvia 274.5 2 Latvia 259.75 8 Estonia 260.75 12 Estonia 268 5 Bulgaria 252.5 17 Bulgaria 256.25 12 Iceland 224 26 Iceland 244.5 18 Hungary 244.5 20 Hungary 240 21

44

Final Scores A+B

COUNTRY Total Score A

(M+O) Total Score B

(M+O) Total Overall Score

A+ B (M+O) OVERALL RANKING Country Nr

Switzerland 255 250.5 505.5 14 1Finland 253 251.5 504.5 15 2Denmark 235.5 243 478.5 21 3Italy 264.5 257 521.5 10 4Portugal 236.5 241 477.5 22 5Austria 273.5 264.5 538 3 6Serbia 247.5 223.25 470.75 23 7NL-HHS 261.5 245 506.5 13 8Romania 271 257 528 9 9Ireland 253 255.5 508.5 12 10Ukraine 258.25 233.5 491.75 19 11Greece 263.5 269.5 533 7 12Scotland 263.5 270 533.5 6 14England 265.5 275.5 541 2 15Norway 275 261.5 536.5 4 16Turkey 209.5 225.5 435 27 17Lithuania 242 226 468 25 18Georgia 264.5 239 503.5 16 19Germany 243 256.5 499.5 17 20France 230 235 465 26 21Malta 248.5 247.5 496 18 22NL-Leiden 268.5 273.5 542 1 23Latvia 274.5 259.75 534.25 5 24Estonia 260.75 268 528.75 8 25Bulgaria 252.5 256.25 508.75 11 26Iceland 224 244.5 468.5 24 27Hungary 244.5 240 484.5 20 28

Acknowledgements

The 35th

Edition of the Telders International Law Moot Court Competition would not have

been possible without the kind support and assistance of the following sponsors:

Van Vollenhoven Foundation

Foundation ‘’Mr. S.J. Visserfonds’’