James5

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or to email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

Well I’m now back from Geneva, arriving home at 6am last Thursday after more than 24 hours of travel.

I was doing an awesome subject called Institutions in International Law with Dr Andrew Mitchell and Bruce Oswald from Melbourne University, and had an amazing two weeks visiting institutions and people and also having some great times with friends in Geneva (such as busking on lake Geneva).

The first week we focused on trade, with a bit of development, IP and health mixed in. We visited the WTO, UN, WHO, ACWL, WIPO, UNCTAD and, one of my favourites, the Australian Mission in Geneva. It was fascinating hearing from people who actually work for these institutions about the work they do and how they got to where they are now. Visiting the United Nations building was particularly inspiring, as we walked through rooms and halls where history was made - for example the room where the League of Nations ended and bumping into a diplomat who had worked at the UN for the past 30 years.

The WTO was also a real blast. We heard from an intern working in the Appellate Body and saw the room where the AB Members actually made actual decisions, had a tour of some of the highlights of the building and heard from the Barbados ambassador on what it’s like negotiating for your country at the WTO. Really fascinating insight into a world that is often behind closed doors.

In week two Oz took over and we headed out to the ‘peace & security’ (with some development and environment mixed in) institutions. We visited and heard from the ICRC, UNEP, UNHCR, OHCR, IOM, ILC (we got to see an actual session!) and my absolute favourite for the trip the Humanitarian Dialogue Centre. The presenters gave us a candid insight into their jobs and lives and what it was really like to work in some extremely intense situations. We heard about the challenges facing the institutions and their staff as they dealt with issues of ‘legitimacy, accountability and governance’ and of course the ‘fragmentation of international law’ (the course buzzwords).

The Humanitarian Dialogue Centre was an especially eye-opening experience for me. They are a small organisation on the banks of lake Geneva that do mediation and negotiation work during conflicts. They are often the first in to help set up discussions between warring parties. The also do work on humanitarian mediation to try and get assistance to those that need it. It’s an amazing institution that I’d love to work one day.

So now I’ve got an essay to write - currently percolating through ideas about the UN Security Council as a peace and security dispute settlement mechanism (trying to think about the differences between trade and peace & security and what could be transferred between the two areas), but we’ll see what happens. I’m also preparing applications for the ICTR and SCSL - so if anyone has any contacts that can help me get a placement for next year let me know!

James5 will be back in action from now - some older links will probably pop up as I go through what I’ve missed, and I’ll also hopefully be writing about some things learnt in Geneva, not to mention the usual topics. If there’s any topic in particular that you’d like me to write about let me know!

Popularity: 10% [?]

I’ve been in Switzerland for the past 4 or so days getting ready to start Institutions in International Law in Geneva. It’s been an interesting and fun time during which I’ve noticed some differences between Australia and Switzerland.

First, the high density, renting approaching to accommodation is totally different to the urban sprawl, half acre blocks we are used to in Melbourne. My friend said most people are happy to rent an apartment in either an apartment block or a multi-storey house. It was especially interesting when travelling from Zurich to Geneva through the country side, seeing every so often a small block of apartments in what seemed to be typical farms and fields.

Second, the high density approach to living also means that bikes and public transport are awesome. I saw all sorts of people using bikes to get around, and hardly any cars. I was in a town called Winterthur and was sorely jealous of how easy it was to not own a car.

Third, the naturalness of knowing more than one language is such an advantage over the terrible culture against second languages that I grew up in. That is, you have to drag kids kicking and screaming when I was in high school to learn a language. In Switzerland, as in Europe generally, everyone knows at least two languages. Switzerland has, I think, four official languages and the country is divided geographically into linguistic groups. So landing in Zurich as I surrounded by German, much to my dismay, but in Geneva it’s French all the way. It was funny on the trip between Zurich and Geneva noticing when the train announcements switched from German-French-English to French-German-English, obviously due to the dominance of French after a certain point in the journey.

Finally, on a more light-hearted note, none of the power points I’ve seen have had on/off switches. It’s all just been ‘plug and play’. Not sure what the deal with that is.

By the way I’m having a great time over here, finally over my jet lag and ready to start the week tomorrow. Will post more as time permits.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Tonight I’m heading to Geneva for three weeks! I’m doing a subject called Institutions in International Law, run by Dr Andrew Mitchell, Bruce Oswald and Dr Tania Voon, wherein we visit a variety of international institutions to learn how they work and more about international law.

It’s going to be an absolutely amazing experience, but may mean blogging is on hold for a bit depending on how easy it is to access the internet in Geneva (and how much spare time we get). When I get back I’m sure I’ll have a ton of posts to do about what we learnt over there.

If you have a guest blog or link you’d like to post on James5, now’s the perfect time - so don’t hesitate to e-mail me.

Popularity: 4% [?]

I’m writing an essay for Legal Ethics on the ethical obligations of lawyers when their client admits to them their guilt. In the process of my research I came across this fantastic quote from Babara Babcock back in 1983.

From lawyers of impeccable professional integrity to those with whom we might be embarrassed to share a profession, all reiterate that innocence or guilt is of no real concern in their daily work. In their trial stories, they usually say nothing at all about the subject. On the general issue, they say it is far easier to defend the guilty because the defense lawyer always wins. If the defendant is acquitted, the lawyer has worked a minor miracle; if convicted, the correct result was reached. Most defense lawyers have reached a state of reasonable doubt in their own minds by the time of trial. Those rare trials of a defendant whom the lawyer truly believes to be innocent, as compared to one about whom she has a reasonable doubt, are grueling and frightening experiences, in which the usual will to win is elevated to a desperate desire to succeed.

I don’t think I have what it takes to be a criminal defense lawyer, yet I’m really hoping to do work in international humanitarian law at the Special Court for Sierra Leone for example. Why do I find it intuitively easier to think about defending alleged war criminals than I do domestic criminals? Maybe it’s because it’s not likely that an acquittal means they’ll be off committing war crimes again? Maybe I’m less inclined to trust post-conflict justice without a thorough defence? I haven’t thought it through so I’m not quite sure.

It’s an interesting question - is “International Legal Ethics” different from domestic legal ethics? I’d be interested in reading about that.

Popularity: 15% [?]

As you may have already known, my moot team recently came back from Adelaide after competing in the South East Asia Pacific round of the ELSA WTO Moot. Since last November we have been working extremely hard on our submissions. Many late nights were spent in the library, many bad dinners were eaten, some of the team even welcomed in the new year from the fifth floor of the law building. Even after our writtens were handed in we continued to practice our oral submissions and refine our arguments.

At Adelaide we enjoyed the Oaks Plaza in Glen Elg and all its beautiful facilities, in between further work on our oral submissions - some hastily printed out at the last moment. Ultimately though we narrowly missed out on moving through to the next round. We came away with best written submissions for the complainant, respondent and overall. We also went into the Grand Final ranked first, but in the end the team from Wellington went away with the victory.

So why work for over three months straight, holed up in the library with three other self-confessed ‘law nerdlings’ on very technical, non-sexy WTO trade law - apart from a uni-paid for trip to beautiful Glen Elg?

Learning the Law
Well, it teaches you the law. After completing the ELSA WTO Moot my knowledge of WTO trade law has exponentially improved. Not only the narrow area of telecommunication covered by the problem, but even a more general understanding of WTO dispute settlement and overarching concepts such as national treatment, market access and ‘likeness’. While some of the team never want to see a WTO dispute again, I’m excited at what I’ll be able to do with this knowledge in the future.

Learning Skills
Taking part in the Moot will hone your writing, presentation and administration skills. I learnt quite a bit about working in a team, cutting down on a word count, ‘dinner diplomacy’, cutting out excess words, oral presentation, cutting words, and general research/organisational skills. Not to mention putting all this in the context of an extremely tight deadline!

Experiencing the Law
Apart from straight-up learning, the Moot also made me feel a little bit of what it would be like to actually be working in WTO law. Having to know the facts intimately, and how the legal issues would play out, really made me feel personally invested in how things were going. Debating with the team as we disagreed about particular arguments we were running added to this realism.

Meeting the Team
One of the absolute best things about doing the Moot for me was spending time with ‘Odawg’, ‘Jrae’ and ‘Email Elimy’. We had an insane time preparing our submissions and an awesome time in Adelaide. I don’t know if I’d see the Moot as quite as worth it as I do now if it wasn’t for the great atmosphere the team had. Not to mention getting to know our great coaches Andrew and Tania, who went far beyond the call of duty in helping us out.

Meeting People
Finally, the Moot gave me an awesome opportunity to meet some really interesting people. Eminent trade lawyers, academic experts, barristers and WTO appellate body staff - I was amazed at the range of people I met, all of whom were willing and open to share how they got to where they were.

So all in all I would highly recommend you take part in the WTO Moot if you get the opportunity. Especially if you know some crazy cats that you’ll be doing it with! Even if you don’t get to Geneva you’ll have a smashing time and if worse comes to worse, as much as I hate the phrase, “it does look good on your resume”. So maybe, Jessup here I come?

Popularity: 15% [?]