Go On! The Future of Canada-U.S. Crossborder Relations

(Go On! is an occasional item on symposia and other events of interest)
On May 6-7, the Canadian Bar Association's International Law Section will host its annual international law conference in Vancouver, this year focusing on The Future of Canada-U.S. Crossborder Relations. Co-chaired by IntLawGrrls guest/alumna Noemi Gal-Or, the conference will feature IntLawGrrl Lucy Reed as its keynote speaker. The International Law Section will bring together practicing lawyers, legal academics, government officials, and other stakeholders to initiate a wide-ranging dialogue on cross-border legal questions. The conference will cover topics ranging from the multiplicity of laws governing cross-border trade to cross-border mediation and arbitration to effective remedies for corporate complicity in international human rights abuse. You can register for the conference here.

Write On! ASIL's 2009 annual meeting

(Write On! is an occasional item about notable calls for papers.) Co-chairs of next year's annual meeting of the American Society of International Law already have issued calls for proposals for panels or New Voices papers.
The meeting, the 102d in ASIL's history and the 1st for new President and IntLawGrrl Lucy Reed (below right), will be held March 25-28, 2009, in Washington, D.C. Its theme: "International Law as Law." Co-chairs -- Stephen Mathias, Legal Adviser's Office, U.S. State Department Legal Adviser's Office, Anthea E. Roberts of the London office of Debevoise & Plimpton, and Georgetown Law Professor Carlos Manuel Vázquez -- explain:

Like domestic law, international law is created, implemented and enforced – but in a manner that is distinct, varied, and constantly evolving. Understanding how international law functions as law today requires an examination of the nature of the actors in the international legal system and the changing ways in which they interact with one another. These developments are challenging and transforming traditional visions of international law, sparking new and renewed theoretical and practical debates.

Topics thus to be explored at the annual meeting include:

► Changing character of fundamental aspects of the international legal system, including the sources of international law, the role of states and their constituent branches of government in generating and implementing international obligations (including the role of domestic courts in enforcing treaty obligations);

► Law-making and law-executing functions of international organizations, and the role of non-state actors (including civil society, individuals and businesses) as creators, enforcers and subjects of international law; and

► Developments in substantive law and innovations in techniques for achieving compliance.

To propose a panel, complete and submit the online Program Proposals Form before June 16, 2008. "[S]tudents and new professionals (academic or non-academic)" who'd like to present scholarship within the meeting theme should complete and submit the online New Voices Proposals Form before June 30, 2008.

Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission: Findings on allegations of rape during armed conflict

The Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission will conduct its final hearing -- the second of two hearings on damages -- on 19-30 May 2008. The EECC was established by agreement of Eritrea (flag below left) and Ethiopia (flag at right), as part of the peace process ending hostilities that broke out in May 1998. The jurisdiction of the EECC is to decide by binding arbitration claims that relate to the prior conflict and “result from violation of international humanitarian law, including the 1949 Geneva Conventions, or other violations of international law.” The commissioners are Hans van Houtte (President), George Aldrich, John Crook, James Paul and me, Lucy Reed. A description of the EECC and its proceedings appears at this page of the website of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the Hague-based institution that serves as the Commission's registrar.
As an arbitration tribunal determining post-war violations of international humanitarian law on a civil rather than a criminal basis, and proceeding with minimal resources and time, the EECC has understandably generated little coverage. It is therefore worth flagging that the EECC has addressed allegations of rape in several awards. (As a commissioner, I cannot comment, but merely quote from or refer to the awards.)
The following virtually identical “Comment on Rape” appears in the Partial Awards in the “Central Front” Claims (Ethiopia’s Claim 2; Eritrea’s Claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 & 12) (quoting from the latter, section D, pp. 9-11; footnote omitted, emphases supplied by the Commission):

36. The Commission considers that allegations of rape deserve separate general comment. Despite the incalculable suffering inflicted upon Ethiopian and Eritrean civilians alike in the course of this armed conflict, the Commission is gratified that there was no suggestion, much less evidence, that either Eritrea or Ethiopia used rape, forced pregnancy or other sexual violence as an instrument of war. Neither side alleged strategically systematic sexual violence against civilians in the course of the armed conflict and occupation of Central Front territories. Each side did, however, allege frequent rape of its women civilians by the other’s soldiers.

37. The Parties agree that rape of civilians by opposing or occupying forces is a violation of customary international law, as reflected in the Geneva Conventions. Under Common Article 3(1), States are obliged to ensure that women civilians are granted fundamental guarantees, including the prohibition against “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds,mutilation, cruel treatment and torture . . . outrages on personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” Article 27 of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War ... provides:

"Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity.

"Women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution or any form of indecent assault."

38. Article 76.1 of Protocol I adds: “Women shall be the object of special respect and shall be protected in particular against rape, forced prostitution and any other form of indecent assault.”

39. We turn now to the specific allegations and proffered evidence concerning rape of civilian women. Both Parties explained that rape is such a sensitive matter in their culture that victims are extremely unlikely to come forward, and when they or other witnesses do present testimony, the evidence available is likely to be far less detailed and explicit than for non-sexual offenses. The Commission accepts this, and has taken it into account in evaluating the evidence. To do otherwise would be to subscribe to the school of thought, now fortunately eroding, that rape is inevitable collateral damage in armed conflict.

40. Given these heightened cultural sensitivities, in addition to the typically secretive and hence unwitnessed nature of rape, the Commission has not required evidence of a pattern of frequent or pervasive rapes. The Commission reminds the Parties that, in its Partial Awards on Prisoners of War, it did not establish an invariable requirement of evidence of frequent or pervasive violations to prove liability. The relevant standard bears repeating ...:

"The Commission does not see its task to be the determination of liability of a Party for each individual incident of illegality suggested by the evidence. Rather, it is to determine liability for serious violations of the law by the Parties, which are usually illegal acts or omissions that were frequent or pervasive and consequently affected significant numbers of victims."

41. Rape, which by definition involves intentional and grievous harm to an individual civilian victim, is an illegal act that need not be frequent to support State responsibility. This is not to say that the Commission, which is not a criminal tribunal, could or has assessed government liability for isolated individual rapes or on the basis of entirely hearsay accounts. What the Commission has done is look for clear and convincing evidence of several rapes in specific geographic areas under specific circumstances.

42. Perhaps not surprisingly, the Commission has found such evidence, in the form of unrebutted prima facie cases, in the Central Front regions where large numbers of opposing troops were in closest proximity to civilian populations (disproportionately women, children and the elderly) for the longest periods of time – namely, Senafe Town in Eritrea and Irob Wereda in Ethiopia. Knowing, as they must, that such areas pose the greatest risk of opportunistic sexual violence by troops, Eritrea and Ethiopia were obligated to impose effective measures, as required by international humanitarian law, to prevent rape of civilian women. The clear and convincing evidence of several incidents of rape in these areas shows that, at a minimum, they failed to do so.

43. For other areas along the Central Front, although there was evidence of occasional rape (deserving of at least criminal investigation), the Commission did not find sufficient evidence on which to find either government liable for failing to protect civilian women from rape by its troops.

The main findings on rape appear in the Partial Awards in Eritrea’s Central Front Claims (paras 80-81); Ethiopia’s Central Front Claim (paras 83-84; Ethiopia’s Civilians Claim (paras 83-90); Ethiopia’s Western and Eastern Front Claims (paras 49-56); and Eritrea’s Prisoner of War Claim (paras. 139-142).

Women @ ASIL redux

As we did last year, today we take note of all the women set to speak at "The Politics of International Law," the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law, April 9-12, 2008, in Washington, D.C. (Details & registration here.)
Noted very few sessions with no women, and many with more than 1 woman panelist -- for which we extend heartfelt kudos to Co-Chairs Andrea K. Bjorklund, U. California-Davis (an IntLawGrrls guest/alumna), Marinn Carlson, Sidley Austin, and Michael Scharf, Case Western Reserve; to Executive Director Elizabeth Andersen; to ASIL President José Alvarez; and to Lucy Reed of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (left), who will succeed José as President at the meeting.
Without further ado, here's the IntLawGrrls' honor roll:
Thursday, April 10, 9 am
"The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals": Valerie Oosterveld, U. Western Ontario
"Beyond Kyoto: Dilemmas of Climate Regulation & Equity": Christiana Figueres, U.N. Framework Convention for Climate Change Clean Development Mechanism
"The Politics of the Internet": Jacqueline Lipton, Case Western Reserve; ASIL Vice President Miriam Sapiro, Summit Strategies International; Wendy Selzer, Northeastern U.
"The Sovereign Power to Tax": Sharon Yuan, Sidley Austin, moderator; Avril Haines, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
"New Voices: The Role of International Legal Institutions in Norm Development": Oona Hathaway, U. California-Berkeley, moderator; Natasha Affolder, U. British Columbia; IntLawGrrls' own Karen Bravo, Indiana U.-Indianapolis; Galit Sarfaty, Harvard
Thursday, April 10, 10:45 am
"Civil Liberties in Times of Crisis": Elisa Massimino, Human Rights First
"The Politics of Sudan": IntLawGrrls' own Hope Lewis, Northeastern U., moderator; Courtney Hostetler, Sudan Divestment Task Force
"The Law and Politics of Foreign Sovereign Immunity": Eileen Denza, U. College London
"State Sovereignty & Regional Autonomy: The Asian Experience": Astrid Tuminez, Southeast Asian Research Center City U., Hong Kon
Thursday, April 10, 12:30 pm
Women in International Law Interest Group Luncheon: honoree/speaker will be the Honorable Graciela Dixon (left), Chief Justice of Panama's Supreme Court and President of the International Association of Women Judges
Thursday, April 10, 1 pm
"Polar Politics: Change in the Arctic": Suzanne Lalonde, U. Montreal
"Restating the U.S. Law of International Commercial Arbitration": Carolyn Lamm, White & Case, moderator; Catherine Kessedjian, U. Paris II; the Honorable Diane Wood (far right), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
"Hardening Soft Law: Implementation of the Guiding Principles on Internally Displaced Persons": Roberta Cohen, Brookings Institution; Erika Feller, Assistant High Commissioner for Protection, Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (near right)
Thursday, April 10, 2:45 pm
"International Law & the Fight Against Corruption": Sabine Konrad, Dewey & LeBoeuf, moderator
Thursday, April 10, 4:30 pm
"Presidential Foreign Policy Advisers' Panel": Ruth Wedgwood, Johns Hopkins U.
Friday, April 11, 9 am
"The Legacy of Iraq: Impact on International Law": Sandy Hodgkinson, U.S. Department of Defense; Susan Breau, U. Surrey
"Do International Financial Institutions Repress Development?": Sylvia Kang'ara, U. Washington, moderator; Linn Hammergren (left), World Bank
"Economic Politics & National Security: A Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States Case Study": Linda Menghetti, Emergency Committee for American Trade
"The New Politics of Regulatory Cooperation: The Case of Food Safety": Marsha Echols, Howard U.; Joanne Scott, U. College London
"Feminism v. Feminism: What Is a Feminist Approach to Transnational Criminal Law?": Madhavi Sunder, U. California-Davis; Mary Anne Case, U. Chicago; Catherine O'Rourke, U. Ulster; Kay Warren, Brown U.
Friday, April 11, 10:45 am
"Corporate Counsel Roundtable": Sheila Cheston, BAE Systems, moderator
"The Politics of Adjudication": Merit Janow, Columbia U.
"The Changing International Economic Balance of Power": Jane Bradley, Georgetown U., moderator
"Politics of Teaching International Law": Sarah Cleveland, Columbia U.
"Restoring Rule of Law in Post-Conflict & Stabilization Operations: Respective Roles of Law & Politics": Melanne A. Civic, U.S. Department of State, moderator; Colette Rausch, U.S. Institute of Peace; Jane Stromseth, Georgetown U.
Friday, April 11, 1 pm
"Just Back from the Human Rights Council": Margaret Satterthwaite, New York U., moderator; Yvonne Terlingen, Amnesty International; and IntLawGrrls' own Connie de la Vega, U. San Francisco
"When Subnational Met International: The Politics & Places of Cities, States & Provinces in the World": Judith Resnik, Yale U.; Christina R. Sevilla, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
"If Water Respects No Political Boundaries, Does Politics Respect Transboundary Waters?": Alice Aureli, UNESCO; Jutta Brunée, U. Toronto
"Capital Markets Agenda for International Regulatory Reform": Esta Stecher, Goldman Sachs; Annette Nazareth, former Commissioner, U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
Friday, April 11, 2:45 pm
"Foreign Ministry Legal Advisers' Roundtable": María del Luján Flores (left), Permanent Mission of Uruguay to the Organization of American States
Saturday, April 12, 9 am
"Universal Jurisdiction: It's Back!": IntLawGrrls' own Diane Orentlicher, Open Society Institute
"The Shifting Sands of Treaty Interpretation": Isabella Van Damme, Cambridge U.
"New Voices: Peace & Security Norms & Institutions in Historical Context": Allison Danner, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Northern District of California, moderator
Saturday, April 12, 10:45 am
"International Humanitarian Law & Non-State Actors": Suzanne Spaulding, National Terrorism Commission
"The Politics of Progress in International Law": Betsy Baker, U. Vermont; Rebecca Bratspies, CUNY; Alexandra Kemmerer, U. Würzburg
"Legal Education Initiatives in Africa": Penelope Andrews, CUNY


(2 other events to keep in mind: ASIL-West reception, 7:30-9 pm Thursday, April 10, and the Bloggers' Reception, of which IntLawGrrls is a proud cosponsor, 6-7 pm Friday, April 11)