I am absolutely delighted to report that the Institute has appointed three excellent people to our team.

• Professor Jeffrey Jowell QC is the foundation Director of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law. He brings enormous expertise in the area, from his scholarly work at UCL to his many practical activities as a barrister, and as an adviser to governments and others on constitutions and legislation. He will commence in October.


• Jill Barrett is the new Senior Research Fellow in Public International Law and Dorset Fellow. She has worked for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in the Legal Advisor's office for more than twenty years and was previously an academic at SOAS and the University of Durham. She commenced in August.


• Jansen Calamita is the new Senior Research Fellow in International Investment Law. He will be on secondment from the University of Birmingham, after having worked at the University of Oxford, and previously at the United States' State Department and with UNCITRAL. He will commence in September.

The summer months do not seem to be a quieter period for the Institute, especially with our ongoing research and new events. For example, we held a two day workshop with experts from various Muslim states, including a large group from Iran, to consider the rights of the child in the criminal justice system in those states. This arose out of our research project on that area, led by Nisrine Abiad and Farkhanda Zia Mansoor. The discussions at the workshop were stimulating and showed the huge value in such comparative research. Kristin Hausler, Jane Nicholson-Biss and Darryl Seaman were brilliant in their organisation of the workshop.

In addition, our research project on Armed Conflicts, Peacekeeping, Transitional Justice: Law as Solution (ATLAS), led by Faria Medjouba and Justine Stefanelli, and which is collaborative project funded by the European Commission, has been organising expert missions to Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cambodia and Sierra Leone to compare the various international tribunals that are part of the post-conflict attempts at peace-building in those states. Eva Lein has been researching on European contract law, as well as having been awarded her doctorate at the highest level, for which she is to be warmly congratulated. We have also had a number of events, including a well attended Rapid Response event on the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on Kosovo.

So the summer months remain a busy time for the Institute and, especially with our new appointments, there is even more to be excited about for the future.

Professor Robert McCorquodale

Institute Director

Quick Links:

• About Us
• Support Us
• Publications
• Research
• Events
• Membership
• People
• Opportunities
• News & Media

Director of Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law

The Institute is delighted to announce the appointment of Professor Jeffrey Jowell QC as the Director of the new Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law, which is established within the Institute. Jeffrey Jowell is a leading authority on public law. He has successfully combined a very distinguished academic career with a legal practice at Blackstone Chambers. He has assisted the drafting of a number of national constitutions. Previously the Dean of UCL's Faculty of Law, he has been awarded a number of honorary degrees and awards including Honorary Bencher of the Middle Temple, Honorary Fellow of UCL and honorary doctorates from the Universities of Cape Town, Athens, RItsumeikan and Paris. He is the UK representative on the Council of Europe's prestigious Commission for Democracy through Law ('The Venice Commission'), was a member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and was recently listed in The Times' inaugural 'Law 100: the UK's most powerful lawyers' list.

Read the full press release here.

New Dorset Fellow, Senior Research Fellow in Public International Law

The Institute is delighted to announce that Jill Barrett has joined them as the Senior Research Fellow in Public International Law and Dorset Fellow. Jill is a highly experienced public international lawyer, having worked for over two decades with the Legal Adviser's team in the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office and previously at SOAS, University of London, and Durham University. She brings an ideal combination of broad practical experience of the multitude of international law issues today with a strong scholarly base, and will enhance the global recognition of the expertise of the Institute in applied research on matters of public international law.

New Senior Research Fellow in International Investment Law

The Institute is delighted to announce that N Jansen Calamita will join them as the Senior Research Fellow in International Investment Law in September, on secondment from the University of Birmingham. He previously worked at the University of Oxford, the United States' State Department, and with UNCITRAL.

Conference and Events Organiser

The Institute is currently recruiting for the position, as Nina Pindham has left the Institute. Click here for a job description.

Executive Assistant and Centre Administrator

The Institute is currently advertising for this position, which includes being the Administrator for the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law - click here for the job description.

Eva Lein, Herbert Smith Senior Research Fellow in Private International law, was awarded her PhD by the University of Bayreuth in Germany. Her PhD topic was 'Die Verzögerung der Leistung im europäischen Vertragsrecht' (Late Performance in European Contract Law). The examiners awarded her PhD with 5 times cumma sum laude.

The Institute's development income has increased significantly since our last Newsletter.

Due to the combined efforts of the Bingham Appeal Board and the generosity of the legal profession, companies and trusts, nearly £1,100,000 has been raised to date towards the establishment of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law. Linklaters LLP has now joined Freshfields, Allen & Overy, and Macfarlanes in making a substantial contribution towards the Centre's establishment and the IBA Charitable Trust has renewed its support. Donations such as these, plus a significant contribution from the David and Elaine Potter Foundation (towards the funding of the post of Director), has enabled us to recruit Professor Jeffrey Jowell QC as the Bingham Centre Director and Justine Stefanelli as the Maurice Wohl Fellow in European Law. The Centre will have its official launch in the autumn of this year.

We are pleased to welcome Stephen Kinsella OBE from Sidley Austin LLP and Paul Saunders from Cravath, Swaine and Moore LLP onto the Appeal Board for the Bingham Centre. More information on the Bingham Appeal can be found here.

We are extremely grateful to all of those who have given so generously of their time and resources to help make this appeal a success.

In relation to the Watts Appeal, the Binks Trust has made a very generous contribution to the fund, bringing our total raised to date to nearly £200,000. We have a number of leads we are currently following and hope to be able to report more good news soon. More information about the Watts Fellowship can be found here.

For further information on any development ideas or support, please go to www.biicl.org or contact: Diane Denny, Development Director on 020 7664 4871, email d.denny@biicl.org or Orsi Deak, Development Administrator on 020 7862 5151 email o.deak@biicl.org.

Click here to read an article published by Competition Law Forum members following the last meeting.

Valentina Piccioto

I graduated from juridical sciences in November 2006 and obtained my law degree in April 2009 from the University of Palermo, Italy, specializing in international criminal law with a thesis on international corruption.

The dynamic nature of international law, which I find particularly fascinating, has led me to participate in numerous academic seminars, including ones on criminal law, human rights law, and inter-ethnic conflicts as well as European law in relation to issues of integration and inter-ethnic conflicts and the influence of European courts in national legal systems. I have also participated in extra-curricula activities, in particular in a specialization course on The Legal Status and Responsibilities of Non-state Actors under International Humanitarian Law, International Criminal Law and International Human Rights Law, organized by the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Sciences, in Syracuse, Italy, in 2009.

From September 2009 to June 2010, I was a trainee solicitor in Palermo, conducting various activities such as assisting clients, writing civil acts and letters, as well as assisting with court-related work. The areas I was mainly involved with included property law, family law, employment law, welfare law and commercial law. Although this practical experience has been crucial in increasing my knowledge and develop my capacity to deal with legal issues, as a post-graduate my current objective is to further my studies in international law and human rights with the aim of embarking upon an international career or pursuing academic research.

To this end, I decided to apply for an internship at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, as I believe this kind of experience will help me achieve these goals. I started my internship at the end of June 2010. So far I have participated in two events: a two-day workshop on the rights of the child in criminal law, for which I contributed in writing the summary subsequently published on the Institute website, and the rapid response seminar on the recent ICJ decision on Kosovo. At the moment, I am focusing on a study on human rights during pre-trial detention, researching applicable legislation and doctrinal work which will be included in the final report. I am very grateful to the Institute for this experience, because every day I learn more about international law and human rights law in particular, which was my original goal. I hope that this experience will be the first step towards my professional achievements.

• 40% discount on all Institute events including CPD courses


• Online access to papers from past events


• Subscription to the International and Comparative Law Quarterly, in hard copy and/or online access to the entire archive of the journal


• Subscription to the Institute newsletter, via email


• 40% discount on all Institute publications


• Receive discounted rates at The Montague on The Gardens hotel, London WC1

Towards an Arms Trade Treaty - Now or Never?

Thursday 9 September 2010
17:00 to 19:00
British Institute of International and Comparative Law,
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP

In October 2009, a majority of UN Member States voted to adopt a clear timetable for the development of an arms trade treaty. Building on the preparatory committee's meeting in July, this seminar will discuss the necessity for a treaty and the legal issues that arose in the meetings. Questions of interest include the minimum standards that should be applicable to the use, management and transfer of arms, as well as the limitations states may place on the international transfer of arms.

The Fifteenth Investment Treaty Forum Public Conference

Friday 10 September 2010
09:00 to 17:00
The Law Society,
113 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1PL

There have been some interesting decisions on procedural matters in investment arbitration recently (including Quiborax SA v Bolivia, Giovanna a Beccara and others v Argentina). This conference will look at some of these issues including disclosure of evidence, state privilege, working with witnesses and experts. It will also cover consolidation of claims and transparency (e.g. open hearings, webcasting, transcript availability). Some of the topics including costs and mechanisms to control costs and time of the arbitral process will be considered from the perspective of whether investment arbitration is or should be different from commercial arbitration. It is hoped that through this dialogue the speakers will be able to distil some best practices on certain procedural matters.

PLF MEETING: Regulatory Standards & Liability :
Developing the Appropriate Assessment Model for Medicines

Wednesday 29 September 2010
17:30 to 19:30
British Institute of International and Comparative Law,
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP

Environmental Disputes - Reflecting on a Recent Decision of the International Court of Justice

Tuesday 26 October 2010
17:00 to 19:00
British Institute of International and Comparative Law,
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP

On 20 April 2010, the ICJ delivered an important decision on an environmental regarding the construction and operation of pulp mills on the river Uruguay, on the border of Argentina and Uruguay. According to this decision, Uruguay may continue to operate a pulp mill that was built without respecting certain procedural obligations contained in an agreement between the two States.

As this case raises a number of interesting issues, this seminar will discuss the findings of the Court, as well as the broader environmental law context and the way environmental disputes are currently being handled by the courts.

34th Annual FA Mann Lecture

Monday 8 November 2010
18:00 to 19:00
The Old Hall,
The Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3TL

Mandatory Laws in International Arbitration

Thursday 11 November 2010
17:00 to 19:00
1 Wood Street, London, EC2V 7WS

This seminar, hosted by Eversheds, will explore the topic of mandatory laws in international arbitration. Such laws profess to apply irrespective of the wishes of the parties and may reflect a state's public policy or socio-economic interests. In certain circumstances, mandatory laws can restrict or displace party autonomy, raising inevitable conflicts between the interests of the parties and the laws of the various states connected with the dispute. How arbitrators should resolve such conflicts and the extent to which they should apply mandatory laws is a central theme of this seminar. One panel of speakers will consider the general nature of mandatory laws, the justification for their application by tribunals, and how they affect the international enforcement of arbitral awards. A second panel will examine particular mandatory laws, for example in Switzerland, Australia and England, and consider topical issues in respect of each of these jurisdictions.

Workshop on Criminal Law and the Rights of the Child

On 28-29 June, the Institute held a training workshop to bring together law professionals (lawyers, judges, prosecutors and human rights defenders) from the UK and from a number of Muslim states to consider the rights of children in their criminal justice systems. Through this workshop, law professionals from states such as Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Pakistan, shared their views on the current criminal justice processes applicable to young offenders. This two-day session was organized as part of the Institute's research project on 'Criminal Law and the Rights of the Child in Muslim States', which aims to enhance the implementation of non-discriminatory laws relating to children in the criminal justice system of Muslim States.

The workshop started with a presentation of the international human rights framework and the specific international human rights standards relating to juvenile justice, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and also various soft law texts. The regional mechanisms promoting and protecting human rights were also analysed, including Europe with the Council of Europe, the Americas with the Organization of American States and Africa with the African Union.

Once the general context of the workshop had been debated, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and its Covenant on the Rights of the Child in Islam, adopted in 2004, was discussed in detail. This was followed by a comparative presentation of international human rights law and Islamic criminal law aspects. While the UNCRC provides that the age of majority applicable in most States is 18 years of age, it does not prescribe an age for criminal responsibility. According to Rule 4 of the Beijing Rules: 'in those legal systems recognizing the concept of the age of criminal responsibility for juveniles, the beginning of that age shall not be fixed at too low an age level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity'. However, by only stating 'too low an age', the Beijing Rules do not give a specific definition of such age, thus leaving room for interpretation to the courts, which may be of concern where a young individual is accused of a serious crime. This workshop highlighted that, under Islamic criminal law, various stages of development are differentiated and that the age of criminal responsibility is associated with a child's attainment of puberty, along with his or her capability of complete understanding.

Following the comparative perspective, the workshop continued with a detailed presentation of the ways young offenders are dealt with in the criminal justice system in various states, including Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. The workshop also included a session on the youth justice system in the United Kingdom, during which it was noted that the current age for criminal responsibility, set at 10 in England and Wales, is too low according to the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

The Institute was particularly pleased to host this workshop, which was successful not only because of the quality of the presentations given but also because of the high level of participation and interest demonstrated by the forty delegates present.

Discussion Seminar on the International Criminal Court Review Conference

On 24 June, the Institute, in association with Chatham House, held a discussion seminar on the ICC Review Conference which took place in Kampala, Uganda, from 31 May-11 June 2010. This event was chaired by Elizabeth Wilmshurst (Chatham House) and speakers included Dapo Akande (University of Oxford), Christopher Hall (Amnesty International), Akbar Khan (Commonwealth Secretariat) and Chris Whomersley (FCO). Participants in the discussion included representatives from government, NGOs, academia and practicing lawyers. The Review Conference was deemed a success for several reasons, including the location of the Review Conference and the fact that experts were involved in the debate, and not just governmental representatives. While one of the achievements of the Review Conference related to an agreement on the definition of the crime of aggression and its inclusion within the Rome Statute, this discussion highlighted that it was now time to shift the focus to other important matters such as the principle of complementarity according to which the ICC must act as a court of last resort and the capacity to prosecute crimes under the Rome Statute needs to be further developed at the national level. Another area which requires further action is the cooperation between the ICC and the state parties which currently suffers from some shortcomings which need to be remedied in order to ensure the success of the Court. As a result, one of the benefits of the Review Conference was to stress that, once a state has ratified the Rome Statute, it still has a number of obligations to fulfil.

New Developments on the Rights of the Accused at Home and Abroad

In a significant move to protect the rights of suspects in criminal justice systems, the European Commission has proposed a Directive on the right to information in criminal proceedings. It establishes minimum standards regarding the rights of suspected and accused persons to information about their rights and information about the charge in criminal proceedings against them, and is applicable from the time the accused is made aware that he or she is suspected of having committed a criminal offence until the conclusion of the proceedings (including any appeals). Interestingly, the proposed Directive applies to all criminal proceedings, regardless of whether the accused is a European citizen.

In addition to minimum standards, the Directive also includes a model Letter of Rights to be provided to the accused upon arrest which includes information regarding the charges against the suspect and rights with regard to legal assistance, interpretation and deprivation of liberty. The proposal is part of the Procedural Rights Roadmap, adopted in November 2009 and aimed at improving the functioning of judicial cooperation across the EU member states. Article 82(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides the European Parliament and Council with the power to establish minimum rules regarding several areas of criminal justice, including the rights of individuals in criminal procedure. The proposal on the right to information is the result of a long history of respect for the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the adoption of the fundamental rights guaranteed in the European Convention on Human Rights into the EU legal order as general principles of the Union. Substantive harmonisation of criminal procedure such as this and that established by the Directive on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, adopted on 16 June 2010, will further enhance judicial cooperation and mutual recognition in the criminal sphere.

Under its special arrangements, the UK has several options with regard to this proposal. It can opt into the measure and take part in negotiations, or it can choose not to take part in the measure and therefore not be part of further negotiations. The Treaty of Lisbon provides the UK with a third option: it can invoke what is known as the 'emergency brake' in Article 82(3), which suspends negotiations until consensus is reached. The UK has opted into the earlier directive on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, but the situation with the current proposal may not be the same, as its provisions mark a substantial incursion of EU law into UK criminal procedure. In any case, the UK must make a decision by the end of October.

Revised UNCITRAL Rules

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has adopted the revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, amending the original Arbitration Rules in place since 1976.

Changes include:

• a list of required documents that must accompany both the 'notice to arbitrate' (article 3(3)(a)-(g)) and the 'response' thereto (article 4(2)(a)-(f))
• provision on multiple parties and joinder of third parties (a)
• article 17(5)); more comprehensive rules regarding the appointment and replacement of arbitrators (articles 7-15);
• a new provision dealing with the waiver of liability of arbitrators and other appointed individuals (article 16);

Read the full document here.

ICJ rules on Kosovo's Declaration of Independence

In October 2008, the General Assembly of the United Nations requested that the International Court of Justice render an advisory opinion on the legality of Kosovo's February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence. On 22 July the Court delivered its opinion that there was not a violation of UN Resolution 1244, and that international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence: therefore 'the declaration of independence on 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law.'

The Institute held a Rapid Response Seminar on the Decision on 5 August, which was very well attended. This rapid response seminar discussed the immediate aftermath of this opinion and its wider impact on the development of international law, as well as specific issues relating to self determination and state-building.

Read commentary on the decision by Robert McCorquodale here.

Link to ICJ Decision.

Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo
(July 23, 2010)

The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court has granted the prosecutor's request to suspend the Trial Chamber's order to release Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. Lubanga will continue to be detained.

On July 8, the Trial Chamber ordered that the criminal proceedings against Lubanga be suspended. It said the prosecution created a situation in which 'the fair trial of the accused is no longer possible, and justice cannot be done,' by refusing to comply with an order to disclose the identity of an individual who helped it in assembling its witnesses. On July 14, the Trial judges ordered that Lubanga be released.

The Chamber ruled that releasing Lubanga pending the final determination on the stay of the proceedings would jeopardize the trial.

Read more here.

Seychelles has ratified the Rome Statute. Read the press release here.

Prosecutor v Haradinaj et al
(July 19, 2010)

The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has quashed the Trial Chamber's acquittal of three former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) members (Ramush Haradinaj, Idriz Balaj, and Lahi Brahimaj) and ordered a partial retrial - the first order of a retrial in the history of the Tribunal.

The defendants, indicted in 2005, were charged as participants in a joint criminal enterprise relating to crimes against humanity and violations of the laws of war for their alleged participation in the persecution and kidnapping of pro-Serb civilians in Kosovo.

Click here for full document.

Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia:
Co-Prosecutors appeal decision on Duch verdict

On 16 August, Co-Prosecutors filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgment of the Trial Chamber in the trial of Kaing Guek Eav, asking for the Supreme Court Chamber to increase the term of imprisonment set out in its verdict of 26 July 2010.

Kaing, 67, a former prison chief better known as Comrade Duch, went on trial in 2009 for war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role in the deaths of at least 12,380 prisoners at Phnom Penh's notorious Tuol Sleng torture centre.He was the first of five defendants to appear before the UN-backed tribunal, and the first surviving Khmer Rouge leader to face an international trial.

In his verdict hearing on 26 July 2010, Duch was found guilty of murder, torture, rape, crimes against humanity and ordered to serve 35 years, but is expected to serve half that due to time already spend in custody.

The Co-Prosecutors believe that 'the Judgment gives insufficient weight to the gravity of Duch's crimes and his role and his willing participation in those crimes'.

In its July 26 verdict, the court said it had decided against life in prison for several reasons, including Duch's expressions of remorse, cooperation with the court, his 'potential for rehabilitation' and the harsh life under the Khmer Rouge.

Read the press release here.

The Convention came into force on July 1, 2010, with five Council of Europe Member States (Albania, Denmark, Greece, the Netherlands, and San Marino) ratifying it. The Convention established 'the various forms of sexual abuse of children as criminal offences, including such abuse committed in the home or the family.'

Mengesha Kimfe v Switzerland (Application no. 24404/05), Agraw v Switzerland (Application no. 3295/06)

The ECtHR ruled unanimously that a five-year separation of unsuccessful asylum-seeker couple, pending their deportation, was contrary to article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Read press release here.

Kopylov v Russia

The Court found four violations of article 3 of the Convention (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) regarding the tortures inflicted to the applicant in police custody, and the failure to investigate effectively about it.

UK opts in to European Investigation Order

The UK has decided to opt in to a proposal that will simplify requests by police in other EU Member States to investigate suspects in criminal cases. On 10 August 2010, UK Home Secretary Theresa May told British MPs that the government was to join the European Investigation Order, a proposal from eight EU Member States led by Belgium.

The Order would give investigators in criminal cases access to evidence in other states.

The British government is calling the move a new 'invaluable tool' in the fight against trans-border crime, but civil liberties spokespersons believe the move may force police to investigate individuals for acts that are not considered crimes in their home state.

Currently, European police may make requests for help in investigations through European Mutual Legal Assistance. The EIO, a directive initiated by Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Spain, Luxembourg, Austria, Slovenia and Sweden, would replace and streamline this system.

Click here to read the order.

The United States Supreme Court's ruling in Berghuis, Warden v Thompkins (US Sup Court case.) on 1 June 2010 narrows the protections provided by the Court in 1966 in Miranda v Arizona (link). The Miranda is known for its establishment of the Miranda Warnings, a list of rights read to suspects by arresting police officers. The Thompkins case is the third in a series of decisions which many have viewed as gradually reducing the protections afforded by the Miranda case. The earlier two cases, Powell and Schatzer permitted the police to vary the wording of the warning, and engage in a second round of questioning of suspects who had previously invoked their rights once two weeks had passed from their release from custody. The Thompkins case follows this trend by holding that a suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warnings and has not invoked them, waives the right to remain silent if he or she makes an uncoerced statement to the police. Justice Sotomayor's dissent labelled the majority decision a paradox, requiring a suspect to speak if he or she wants to remain silent.

Elena Kagan confirmed to US Supreme Court

The Senate has confirmed Elena Kagan, the current Solicitor General, to the United States Supreme Court. The vote of 63-37 was largely along party lines, with five Republicans supporting the nominee and one Democrat, Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, opposing her.

Kagan becomes the nation's 112th justice, fourth woman and just the sixth member of the court who isn't a white male. For the first time, the nine-member court will have three women: Ruth Ginsberg appointed by President Clinton and Sonia Sotomayor appointed last year by President Obama.