Review Report
35th Edition of the
Telders International Law
Moot Court Competition
Peace Palace, The Hague
26
26--28 April 2012
page
FOREWORD
Foreword by the Chairman of the Telders Supervisory Board
Members of the Supervisory Board
Telders Organizing Office 2012
Legacy of Professor Dr. B.M. Telders
National Rounds Teams
Participating Teams of the Semi-Finals
Sponsors Teams
International Board of Review
Judges of the Semi-Finals
Judges of the Final Round
Jury for the Best Oralist Award
Judge Assistants
3
4
4
5
7
11
17
20
24
26
28
29
REVIEWS
University of Oslo
Leiden University
University of Tartu, Elise Nikonov
University of Tartu, Meris Velling
Sara Wyeth, Winner Best Oralist Award
Safi van ‘t Land, Runner-up Best Oralist Award
Prof. Steven Freeland, Best Judge Award
30
31
32
33
34
36
37
RESULTS
Awards
Awards and Winners of the Telders Competition 2012
Final Results 2012
Acknowledgements / Sponsors
40
41
43
45
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
3
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)
4
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.
5
ABC
springer.com
Highlighted Titles in Law from Springer and
T.M.C. Asser Press
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: 1-201-348-4505
7 Email: [email protected] 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: [email protected] 7 Prices are subject to change without notice. All prices are net prices.
015189x
NATIONAL ROUNDS TEAMS
England
University 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
7
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
8
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
9
PARTICIPATING TEAMS SEMI-FINALS
Austria
Vienna University
Team coaches:
Team members:
Ms. Jane A. Hofbauer
Mr. Markus Beham
Mr. Dominik Malicki
Ms. Viviane Arnolds
Ms. Martina Gross
Ms. Michaela Hinterholzer
Bulgaria
Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Nickolay Mladenski
Ms. Elisar Bashir
Ms. Desislava Valerieva Stamenova
Mr. Malamir Dobromirov Malamov
Ms. Milena Stefanova Dokova
Ms. Neli Lyubenova Vladinova
Denmark
University of Southern Denmark
Team coaches:
Team members:
Ms. Ulrike Barten
Mr. Bugge Daniel
Ms. Trine Petersen
Ms. Sina Petersen
Mr. Nikolaj Hansen
Mr. Patrick Hansen
England
University College London
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Joseph Markus
Mr. Sam Bright
Ms. Abla O’Callaghan
Ms. Iqra Musaddaq
Mr. Samuel Hawke
Mr. Stuart Bruce
11
Estonia
University of Tartu
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Miiko Vainer
Ms. Kärt Pormeister
Ms. Elise Nikonov
Ms. Kairi Kaldoja
Ms. Jaana Lints
Ms. Meris Velling
Finland
University of Helsinki
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Ukri Soirila
Ms. Minna Anttonen
Ms. Justina Skyrelyte
Ms. Heini Tuura
Mr. Tomas Garcia
France
Institut Catholique de Lille - Faculté Liberté de Droit
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Giuseppe-Matteo Vaccaro-Incisa
Ms. Margot Colasse
Ms. Claire Duquesne
Ms. Sophie Fournier
Ms. Ata Iungu
Ms. Claire-Naila Damamme
Georgia
Tbilisi State University
Team coach:
Team members:
Ms. Tamar Gongadze
Ms. Nino Khukhunaishvili
Ms. Mariam Bilikhodze
Ms. Ana Mirianashvili
Ms. Nino Grigolia
Germany
Universität zu Köln
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. André Gilles
Ms. Anna Stojanov
Ms. Nora vom Brocke
Ms. Lisa Hammelrath
Mr. Thomas Korn
12
Greece
Democritus University of Thrace
Team coaches:
Team members:
Dr. Constantine Antonopoulos
Mr. Dimitrios Batsalas
Ms. Dimitra Fragkou
Ms. Christina-Dimitra Chelioti
Mr. Argyrios Papaefthimiou
Hungary
Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE)
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Bence Spiczmüller
Ms. Zsófia Deli
Ms. Eszter Fodor
Mr. Domokos Pásztor
Mr. Zoltán Karácsonyi
Ms. Blanka Börzsönyi
Iceland
University of Akureyri
Team coaches:
Team members:
Mr. Andrés Már Magnússon
Ms. Aðalheiður Ámundadóttir
Ms. Tiantian Zhang
Mrs. Kolbrún Eva Ríkharðsdóttir
Ms. Hjördís Olga Guðbrandsdóttir
Mr. Ölvir Karlsson
Ireland
The Honorable Society of King’s Inns
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Michael Connell
Mr. Gearóid Murphy
Ms. Mairead Smith
Mr. James Lawless
Mr. Conor Burke
Italy
University of Padua – Faculty of Law
Team coach:
Team members:
Ms. Eirin Larsen
Mr. Giulio Cortesi
Mr. Marco Bertacchi
Ms. Elisa Spiller
Ms. Giulia Zanchetta
13
Latvia
The University of Latvia
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Māris Lejnieks
Ms. Zane Akermane
Mr. Dainis Pudelis
Mr. Ivars Stankevics
Mr. Artis Straupenieks
Lithuania
Vilnius University
Team coach:
Team members:
Ms. Gintarė Pažereckaitė
Ms. Ieva Matusevičiūtė
Mr. Tadas Varapnickas
Mr. Virgilijus Pajaujis
Ms. Gintarė Taluntytė
Malta
University of Malta
Team coach:
Team members:
Dr. Norman Martinez
Ms. Kristina Miggiani
Mr. Michael Muscat
Ms. Martine Farrugia
The Netherlands I
The Hague University of Applied Sciences
Team coach:
Team members:
Dr. Michail Vagias
Ms. Alexandra Baciu
Mr. Janos Ferencz
Mr. Christopher Then
Mr. Mihail Vatsov
The Netherlands II
Leiden University
Team coaches:
Team members:
Dr. Erik V. Koppe
Ms. Andrea Varga
Ms. Maria Louise Piët
Ms. Safi van ‘t Land
Ms. Florentine Vos
Ms. Sara Wyeth
14
Norway
University of Oslo
Team coaches:
Team members:
Ms. Joanna Nicholson
Mr. Marjan Ajevski
Ms. Militsa Kostova
Ms. Tamar Morchiladze
Ms. Janne Haraldsen
Ms. Synne Ellen Hathway
Portugal
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Miguel Calado Moura
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:
Team members:
Ms. Andrea Kajcsa
Mr. Andrei Palade
Mr. Raul Miron
Ms. Luminiţa Gabura
Mr. Dumitru Cazac
Scotland
University of Edinburgh
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Stephen Bailey
Mr. Harry Skinner
Ms. Anna-Maria Rehbinder
Mr. Usman Waheed
Ms. Anna Klaskala
Serbia
University of Novi Sad
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Dusan Kovacevic
Mr. Nemanja Galic
Ms. Bojana Apic
Mr. David Gutesa
Mr. Nikola Siljegovic
15
Switzerland
University of St. Gallen
Team coach:
Team members:
Ms. Christa Stünzi
Mr. Daniel Trusilo
Ms. Jeehae Jun
Ms. Stefanie Geiger
Ms. AnneCécile Vonlanthen
Turkey
Istanbul University
Team coach:
Team members:
Mr. Engin Galip Şimşek
Ms. Rengin Çimşitoğlu
Ms. Dilara Nur Cansu
Ms. Elif Tan
Mr. Ulaş Efendioğlu
Ukraine
National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy”
Team coach:
Team members:
Ms. Kateryna Krakhmalova
Ms. Kateryna Polishchuk
Mr. Andrii Moskaliuk
Ms. Viktoriia Matsenko
Ms. Mariia Ulianovska
16
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
17
Iceland
Menntamálaráðuneytið – Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
FSHA – Student Union of the University of Akureyri
IceGroup
Eimskip
SBA
VÍS
Slippurinn
Ásprent
Bjarg
Miðlun fasteignir
Deloitte
Frost
Pacta
Bústólpi
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 Lisboa
Edições Almedina
Romania
Fundația “Pro Iure” www.proiure.ro
Ukraine
Risk Reduction Foundation: http://www.rr-f.ch/
Ernst & Young LLC (Ukraine): www.ey.com
18
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
20
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, Teisės
fakultetas
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
21
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
22
JUDGES SEMI-FINALS
The Judges who participated in the International Semi-Finals are highly qualified and welltrained 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
24
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
25
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 for
International 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
26
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 GDL
We 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 law
We 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 law
Written 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 Online
Oxford 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 Journals
The 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
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
28
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
29
REVIEWS
THE UNIVERSITY OF OSLO
Winning 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.
30
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.
31
UNIVERSITY OF TARTU
Winner 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-moremessy) 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
32
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
33
SARA WYETH, LEIDEN UNIVERSITY
Winner 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.
34
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
g
School of Human Rights
Research Series, volume 41
Series price: 109.65 euro | 104 GB pound | 154 US dollar
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)?
‘Truee to tthe
‘True
‘Tru
he aaim
aims
imss of the
the study,
sstu
tudy
dy,, Christophe
Chri
Ch
rist
stop
ophe
he Paulussen
P
Pau
aulusse provides
h i assessmentt off the
th subject
bj t which
hi h will prove a
a comprehensive
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
Order Now!
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.
Please send this form in a sufficiently
stamped envelope to Intersentia
Groenstraat 31 | BE-2640 Mortsel | Belgium
§
ORDER FORM

YES, I would like to order
..… copy(ies) of
Male captus
bene detentus? (ISBN 978-94-0000100-8) at 94 euro per copy
(shipping costs excl.)
Please charge my credit card:
 Visa  MasterCard
name of cardholder: ........................
.......................................................
card number:...................................
expiry date: .....................................
date: ...............................................
signature:

Or fax this form to
+32 3 658 71 21
@
For more information, please call +32 (0) 3 680 15 50
Mr | Mrs | Ms
name:
first name:
company:
street:
postal code:
Or send a message to
[email protected]
no.:
city:
country:
tel:
fax:
email:
VAT no.:
date:
signature:
SAFI VAN ‘T LAND, LEIDEN UNIVERSITY
Runner-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!
36
PROF. STEVEN FREELAND
Winner 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
37
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
38
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
39
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.
40
AWARDS AND WINNERS OF THE TELDERS COMPETITION 2012
WINNER OF THE FINAL ROUND
University of Oslo, Norway
FINALIST TEAM
University College London, England
THE MAX HUBER AWARD FOR BEST OVERALL SCORE
Leiden University, the Netherlands
THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION AWARD FOR BEST MEMORIAL FOR THE APPLICANT
University 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 APPLICANT
Leiden University, the Netherlands
THE AWARD FOR THE BEST ORAL ARGUMENTATION FOR THE RESPONDENT
University 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 AWARD
Prof. Steven Freeland
THE TELDERS AWARD FOR OUTSTANDING TEAM EFFORT
Istanbul University, Turkey
41
GMW Advocaten
The GMW Lawyers look forward to an excellent
competition in our city The Hague and wish all
of the participants a challenging experience!
a prominent law firm
with an international focus
and personal service for
entrepreneurs
foreign entities
expatriates
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 [email protected]
www.gmw.nl/en
www.legalexpatdesk.nl
FINAL RESULTS 2012
Final Scores A
Final Scores B
Total
Total
COUNTRY
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Italy
Portugal
Austria
Serbia
NL-HHS
Romania
Ireland
Ukraine
Greece
Scotland
England
Norway
Turkey
Lithuania
Georgia
Germany
France
Malta
NL-Leiden
Latvia
Estonia
Bulgaria
Iceland
Hungary
TOTAL
SCORE
A (M+O)
RANKING
A (M+O)
255
14
253
15
235.5
24
264.5
7
236.5
23
273.5
3
247.5
19
261.5
11
271
4
253
15
258.25
13
263.5
9
263.5
9
265.5
6
275
1
209.5
27
242
22
264.5
7
243
21
230
25
248.5
18
268.5
5
274.5
2
260.75
12
252.5
17
224
26
244.5
20
COUNTRY
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Italy
Portugal
Austria
Serbia
NL-HHS
Romania
Ireland
Ukraine
Greece
Scotland
England
Norway
Turkey
Lithuania
Georgia
Germany
France
Malta
NL-Leiden
Latvia
Estonia
Bulgaria
Iceland
Hungary
TOTAL
SCORE
B (M+O)
RANKING B
(M+O)
250.5
15
251.5
14
243
19
257
9
241
20
264.5
6
223.25
27
245
17
257
9
255.5
13
233.5
24
269.5
4
270
3
275.5
1
261.5
7
225.5
26
226
25
239
22
256.5
11
235
23
247.5
16
273.5
2
259.75
8
268
5
256.25
12
244.5
18
240
21
43
Final Scores A+B
COUNTRY
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Italy
Portugal
Austria
Serbia
NL-HHS
Romania
Ireland
Ukraine
Greece
Scotland
England
Norway
Turkey
Lithuania
Georgia
Germany
France
Malta
NL-Leiden
Latvia
Estonia
Bulgaria
Iceland
Hungary
Total Score A
(M+O)
Total Score B
(M+O)
Total Overall Score
A+ B (M+O)
OVERALL
RANKING
Country Nr
255
250.5
505.5
14
1
253
251.5
504.5
15
2
235.5
243
478.5
21
3
264.5
257
521.5
10
4
236.5
241
477.5
22
5
273.5
264.5
538
3
6
247.5
223.25
470.75
23
7
261.5
245
506.5
13
8
271
257
528
9
9
253
255.5
508.5
12
10
258.25
233.5
491.75
19
11
263.5
269.5
533
7
12
263.5
270
533.5
6
14
265.5
275.5
541
2
15
275
261.5
536.5
4
16
209.5
225.5
435
27
17
242
226
468
25
18
264.5
239
503.5
16
19
243
256.5
499.5
17
20
230
235
465
26
21
248.5
247.5
496
18
22
268.5
273.5
542
1
23
274.5
259.75
534.25
5
24
260.75
268
528.75
8
25
252.5
256.25
508.75
11
26
224
244.5
468.5
24
27
244.5
240
484.5
20
28
44
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’’