Monday, March 23, 2026

12:00 PM CST

Location: Zoom

This panel will briefly discuss the outcomes of the Preparatory Committee for the Crimes Against Humanity Convention, held from January 19-30, and the work of the ABILA Study Group on Crimes Against Humanity, which published a series of 14 proposals and position papers submitted to the Preparatory Committee during its first session. Panelists will discuss specific proposals on environmental harm, gender crimes, and starvation, as well as proposals to help make the treaty more effective, including inter-state dispute resolution, the possibility of a treaty monitoring body, and shoring up the prevention and capacity-building dimensions of the draft convention.

Moderator:

Professor Leila Nadya Sadat, Washington University in St. Louis School of Law

Speakers:

Professor Olympia Bekou, University of Nottingham School of Law & Human Rights Law Centre

Professor Tom Dannenbaum, Stanford Law School & Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation

Mr. Youssef Hitti, Permanent Mission of Lebanon to the United Nations 

Professor Christopher Lentz, University of Chicago Law School; Register of Damage for Ukraine

Ms. Akila Radhakrishnan, International Human Rights Lawyer

REGISTER HERE

The post Webinar: Towards an Effective and Universal Convention on Crimes Against Humanity appeared first on ABILA.

This blog is part of a series of reflections on ILW 2025 by our Student Ambassadors. Each Student Ambassador engaged with various panels and will share their experiences in the lead up to ILW-West 2026.

International Law Weekend 2025 (ILW 2025), held from October 23 to 25 in New York City, brought together some of the most prominent figures in international law, including diplomats, scholars, and practitioners, for a dynamic and inspiring three-day conference. The event serves as a leading forum for dialogue, scholarship, and collaboration on the future of international law.

This year’s theme, “Crisis as Catalyst in International Law,” examined how periods of upheaval can serve as moments of transformation, highlighting international law’s capacity to address urgent global challenges. The panel “Negotiating the Future Crimes Against Humanity Treaty: Paradigm Shift or Half-Measure?” exemplified this theme and contributed to the broader discussions shaping ILW 2025.

A bright light amid global uncertainty

Elinor Hammerskjöld, UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, recently described the treaty negotiations on crimes against humanity as “a bright light” amid shrinking UN budgets and growing geopolitical strain. That sentiment captured the spirit of the standing-room-only panel, sponsored by the ABILA Study Group on Crimes Against Humanity and moderated by Professor Leila Nadya Sadat, Chair of ABILA, James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law at Washington University School of Law, and Director of the Crimes Against Humanity Initiative.

The panel examined the path forward for the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity, following General Assembly Resolution 79/122, adopted without a vote in December 2024, with 192 of 193 Member States in favor. The resolution established a four-year timeline culminating in Diplomatic Conferences in 2028 and 2029. The speakers described the treaty’s progress as a reaffirmation of states’ commitment to the rule of law and their shared responsibility to prevent and punish atrocity crimes. They emphasized the need to carry that commitment forward as negotiations begin. The Preparatory Committee will convene in January 2026.

Voices of momentum and insight

The room was filled with optimism and shared purpose as Professor Leila Sadat opened by walking the audience through how the proposed Convention reached its current stage. She reflected that the excitement surrounding the treaty signaled more than legal progress but also a renewed faith in the world’s capacity to act together for justice and accountability. She stressed that, even in difficult times, the global effort to finalize a crimes against humanity convention stands as proof that nations still believe in the rule of law, human dignity, and the possibility of collective progress.

The panelists shared perspectives spanning diplomacy, academia, and civil society Ana Paula Lavaelle Arroyo, Legal Adviser to the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the United Nations, provided an invaluable on-the-ground perspective from the Sixth Committee. She described the broad engagement of states leading up to the official opening of treaty negotiations and detailed the practical steps that lie ahead.

The negotiation process formally begins in January 2026, when the preparatory committee and working group lay the groundwork by refining draft text, reviewing and incorporating state proposals, and addressing key technical and legal questions. The committee will reconvene in 2027 to continue this work. States are scheduled to gather for a five-week diplomatic conference at UN Headquarters in 2028, followed by a three-week diplomatic conference in early 2029, with the aim of concluding and adopting the convention.

Professor Tom Dannenbaum of Stanford University underscored the need for the future convention to expressly include starvation, noting that the Rome Statute recognizes it as a distinct offense only as a war crime under Art. 8(2)(b)(xxv), and in the context of crimes against humanity, only through the residual category of “other inhumane acts.” The ICC Prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against senior Israeli leaders includes allegations of starvation, grounded in a pattern of starvation-related conduct. This is significant because starvation has never been prosecuted at the international level. Expressly codifying starvation as a distinct offense in the new convention would be an important development, especially because crimes against humanity can be prosecuted without establishing the existence of an armed conflict. Professor Dannenbaum described starvation as a deliberate and devastating form of mass violence, noting its disproportionate impact on children and pregnant women. He explained that the new convention offers an opportunity to ensure that starvation is fully recognized as a crime against humanity.

(For additional discussion of starvation’s disproportionate impact on pregnant women and children, see UNFPA.)

Akila Radhakrishnan emphasized the importance of integrating gender justice across the convention’s framework. She explained that doing so would help build a gender-competent instrument capable of providing lasting protection for survivors of sexual and gender-based crimes. She called attention to proposals for express recognition of gender apartheid as a crime against humanity, reflecting broader efforts to ensure the convention meaningfully addresses gendered harm.

(See Akila Radhakrishnan & Alyssa Yamamoto on states’ growing support for recognizing gender apartheid in the draft treaty.)

Hugo Relva of Amnesty International highlighted the vital role of civil society organizations, whose expertise and continued engagement will reinforce the treaty’s legitimacy and long-term effectiveness. Sebastiaan Verelst, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Transitional Justice Adviser, connected these discussions to broader questions of implementation, reflecting on how the convention could unify atrocity prevention, accountability, and transitional justice within national systems.

This discussion prompted thoughtful engagement from attendees, many of whom have closely followed the treaty’s development. Questions addressed state cooperation, the role of victims and survivors in shaping the treaty’s final text, and how the proposed convention may complement existing accountability mechanisms. The exchange highlighted both the complexity of the negotiations ahead and the strong international community interest in seeing a comprehensive, practically implemented framework emerge.

ABILA Study Group on Crimes Against Humanity

The panel also marked the launch of the ABILA Study Group on Crimes Against Humanity, a new initiative of the American Branch of the International Law Association that brings together leading scholars and practitioners under the leadership of Professor Leila Sadat.

The study group is reviewing the International Law Commission’s 2019 Draft Articles on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity and developing recommendations to strengthen the treaty’s language and scope. Its work aims to assist state delegations in preparing for formal negotiations.

Current topics under review include key provisions on persecution, the slave trade, starvation, and environmental destruction, as well as issues of prevention, jurisdiction, modes of liability, and dispute settlement. The Study Group is also examining interrelated themes like civil society participation, children, and gender.

The Study Group’s guiding purpose is to ensure that the final treaty builds on and reinforces the principles of international criminal law reflected in existing instruments and customary law, while advancing its progressive development. This includes drawing on foundational instruments such as the Rome Statute of the ICC, the Genocide Convention, and the jurisprudence of international tribunals such as the ICC, ICTY, and ICTR. The Study Group is also committed to engaging with evolving legal concerns and pressing challenges in international criminal law, including addressing critical gaps such as those already discussed in relation to gender justice, starvation, and other systematic forms of harm.

(Read more about the ABILA Study Group here.)

The road ahead

As the world looks toward the formal opening of the Preparatory Committee in January 2026, enthusiasm continues to build. The coming year is expected to see increased global activity, including at the United Nations, as states prepare their initial positions for the treaty’s formal drafting stage. The panelists noted that the lead-up to the 2026 Preparatory Committee meeting may prove decisive in shaping the scope and ambition of the future convention.

ILW 2025 demonstrated that, despite global uncertainty, the international community continues to engage meaningfully with one of international law’s most consequential projects. In a world where global division can feel especially present, the success of ILW 2025 and the overwhelmingly positive response to the crimes against humanity panel offered something powerful: renewed confidence that law, cooperation, and a shared commitment to justice can still guide us forward.

*Claire E. Barrington is a JD/LLM student at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, Missouri, where she is pursuing a dual degree in Law and Negotiation & Dispute Resolution. Before law school, Claire had a nearly decade-long career as a professional ballet dancer, performing with international ballet companies across North America and Europe. Her experiences collaborating with artists from around the world sparked a deep interest in international law and cross-border cooperation. Claire holds dual Bachelor’s degrees in English and Criminal Justice from Miami University (Ohio). At WashU Law, she is a staff editor for the Global Studies Law Review, a research assistant to Professor Leila Sadat in international law, and an active member of the International Law Society.

The post ILW25 Panel Reflection: Negotiating the Future Crimes Against Humanity Treaty: Paradigm Shift or Half-Measure? appeared first on ABILA.

The observation that these are challenging times for international law and that armed conflict is the crucible in which so many of the challenges arise has graduated to the level of cliche and truism. On a more granular level, debate centers on whether the norms of International Humanitarian Law (the law of armed conflict) are still fit for purpose, and on whether there exists a critical mass of compliance and political will to enforce the law. The panel will explore these propositions in contemporary contexts, including the so-called “War on Terror,” Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, Sudan, Venezuela and U.S. drug boat strikes, among others.

Moderator:

Gabor Rona, Professor of Practice, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law; Chair, ABILA International Humanitarian Law Committee

Speakers:

Janina Dill, Dame Louise Richardson Chair in Global Security, Blavatnik School of Government; Fellow at Trinity College and Co-Director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law, and Armed Conflict (ELAC)
Cordula Droege, Chief Legal Officer and Head of the Legal Division, International Committee of the Red Cross
Oona A. Hathaway, Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School; President-Elect, American Society of International Law
Mike Schmitt, Professor of International Law, University of Reading School of Law; Affiliate, Harvard Law School’s Program on International Law and Armed Conflict; Retired USAF Judge Advocate

Registration for this webinar is free and open to anyone. Only those who attend the live broadcast will be eligible for NY CLE. The application for NY CLE accreditation is currently pending.

Register HERE or by clicking the poster above.

The post CLE Webinar: A Report Card on the Laws of Armed Conflict appeared first on ABILA.

This blog is part of a series of reflections on ILW 2025 by our Student Ambassadors. Each Student Ambassador engaged with various panels and will share their experiences in the lead up to ILW-West 2026.

What is a state? Ostensibly, the answer is straightforward: defined by the declaratory approach in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Indeed, the Montevideo Convention holds that a state is a “person of international law” if it has these four elements: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) a government; and (d) the capacity to enter into relations with other states. Others may point to alternative theories, such as the constitutive theory of statehood, which holds that only recognition by other states creates legal statehood, rather than a set of elements. While various ideas of statehood differ in theory, most have historically relied on the assumption that a state will occupy its own established sovereign territory.

But how do we define a state when its established territory disappears before our eyes? What happens when a state’s former territory is destroyed and essentially uninhabitable? While there may be answers to these questions under international rules of war and conquest, can we say the same for climate change-induced sea-level rise? At International Law Weekend 2025, the panel entitled “Keeping Sinking States Afloat: The Crisis of Climate Change-Induced Sea-Level Rise and the International Legal Framework” tackled this complex issue. The panel of experts, including Michael Gerrard, Benjamin Salas Kantor, Vui Gemma Nelson, Eran Sthoeger, and Patrícia Galvão Teles, led by moderator Claire Robertson, discussed the future of recognition under international law for states at risk of losing territory to climate change. In particular, this panel sought to analyze whether climate change-induced sea-level rise should serve as a “catalyst” for changes to traditional frameworks of statehood. However, while discussing theoretical approaches to state territory loss, the panelists never lost sight of the human aspect of this issue. While states are at risk of losing power and standing on the international stage, it is the people living in these states who will lose the most.

Notably, Salas Kantor began his assessment by calling for a departure from strict adherence to the Montevideo Convention’s statehood framework. His key concern involving the current Montevideo system was that there are no definitional legal statehood criteria for states that permanently lose their territory. Instead, the Montevideo Convention treats the territory a state occupies as almost a key anchor in its claim to legal statehood. Articles 1, 9, and 11 all make direct references to a state’s territory in connection with its legal claim to statehood. It is almost as if the convention assumes that a state will not make a legal claim to statehood without territory. Instead of a declaratory approach, Salas Kantor posited that the international community should follow the “effectiveness” theory of state recognition. In this theory, a state’s effective control over factors such as its population or government will be the key to determining whether a state exists, rather than strict adherence to the four Montevideo factors. Under the effectiveness theory, a state would not lose statehood if its territory became inaccessible due to climate change. Sthoeger also described his assessment of the current international legal standards for statehood. In his view, when the traditional statehood factors are no longer met, this might not result in an automatic loss of statehood. In fact, there may be a transitional period in which the state retains its status while no longer controlling a territory.

In contrast, Nelson emphasized the importance of fighting to preserve existing state territories, particularly for certain island nations. Nelson called specific attention to the cultural significance of the land for Samoa and the Samoan people. Samoa is an island state that is in danger of losing its territory to climate change, either through rising sea levels or related habitat loss. The word for “land” and for “blood” is the same in Samoan (‘ele’ele), Nelson noted, remarking on the deep cultural significance of the land to the Samoan people. Losing the island state’s territory to the effects of climate change would not only damage Samoa’s legal claim to statehood but also irreparably harm its people culturally. While forward-looking legal analyses of continuing statehood are useful, the international community should not abandon efforts to combat climate change’s effects and preserve existing state territory. According to Nelson, Indigenous rights and heritage should remain a priority for policymakers when making decisions related to continuing statehood.

Galvão Teles then discussed key takeaways from the International Law Commission’s (ILC) recent report on sea-level rise in relation to international law. The ILC began studying this topic after the U.N. General Assembly acknowledged and passed resolutions describing the existential threat of climate change-induced rising sea levels in several sessions between 2015 and 2024. The ILC concluded that state continuation practice, especially those related to climate change, is still developing. As a result, Galvão Teles noted, it is challenging to reach concrete legal conclusions regarding how this practice may operate in the future. Galvão Teles also observed that the Montevideo recognition factors describe a state’s creation, not necessarily specific state continuation practices when its territory is lost. As such, there is no international legal principle stating that states cannot continue to exist as legal entities even with partial or total submersion of land territory.

Following the discussion on the ILC report, Gerrard reflected on states’ continuity options for their populations in light of partial or total land submersion. One option would be to move the state’s population to another state that allows them to live within its territory. The submerged state’s citizens would have to somehow assimilate into the host country’s society and cease to be citizens of their country of origin. This would not be a continuation of the submerged state, but it would allow the state’s former citizens to survive. An example of this concept in practice, Gerrard stated, was in the 1980s, with many individuals from the Marshall Islands permanently resettling in Arkansas due to economic and environmental strife. Many of these individuals became U.S. citizens or otherwise assimilated into American culture to survive after being displaced from their home state.

Another method, Gerrard noted, would be for a willing host state to cede some of its territory to the displaced state. The displaced state would then move its citizens into this ceded territory and reestablish itself. Separately, Gerrard also reminded the audience of the concept of association with another state, in which two states merge their territories to create a single state combining both territories. Gerrard cited Zanzibar and Tanganyika’s 1964 unification as an example of this concept in action.

Gerrard’s proposed state continuation options prompted several responses from fellow panelists. Sthoeger highlighted the dependence of several continuity approaches on the goodwill of host states toward displaced populations. Galvão Teles and Nelson expressed concerns about inadequate protections for migrants, with Galvão Teles emphasizing the need to reform nationality laws and humanitarian visa processes. Nelson also raised questions about territorial equity, positing that host countries would relegate displaced populations to inferior lands, particularly noting that former colonizers would likely offer inequitable arrangements. As an alternative approach, Salas Kantor suggested implementing land lease agreements rather than permanent territorial transfers for resettlement areas.

Closing out the panel, Nelson reminded the audience of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) July 2025 Advisory Opinion. This opinion establishes that all states have a legal duty to mitigate climate change and prevent significant harm to the climate. In that sense, it is the legal responsibility of all states to collaborate and prevent these states from disappearing. Rather than focusing solely on post-displacement solutions, the international community must prioritize its collective obligation to address the root causes of climate change. The ICJ opinion ultimately underscored that while the legal frameworks for state continuation analyzed by the panelists deserve serious consideration, states’ primary responsibility remains preventing territory loss altogether.

*Vibha Bangarbale is a rising 2L at Case Western Reserve University School of Law. She is a recipient of the Hugo Grotius International Law Fellowship scholarship and has served as a researcher at the Cox International Law Center. She holds an M.A. in International Affairs with a concentration in International Law and Organizations from The George Washington University and a B.A. in Global Affairs from George Mason University. At the CWRU School of Law, Vibha has taken on leadership roles, serving as Vice President of the South Asian Law Students Association and Secretary of the International Law Society.

The post ILW25 Panel Reflection: Keeping Sinking States Afloat: The Crisis of Climate Change-Induced Sea-Level Rise and the International Legal Framework appeared first on ABILA.

ABILA Outstanding Achievement Award

The ABILA Outstanding Achievement Award was established to recognize outstanding contributions in the field of international law. Such contributions might include, but are not limited to service to an international organization, a State, or an international court or tribunal; or to teaching, research, or scholarship in the field of international law. While candidates are reviewed comprehensively, factors considered may include consideration of an individual’s specific extraordinary service initiatives and/or sustained superior contributions to the field of international law over a number of years, as well as visionary and innovative leadership.

2025 Recipient: Brenda Hollis

Brenda Hollis is currently serving as Principal Trial Lawyer (D-1 level), Office of the Prosecutor, International Criminal Court, in which capacity she leads the investigation into possible international crimes committed in Ukraine, reporting directly to the ICC Prosecutor. Prior to assuming her duties with the ICC OTP, Ms. Hollis served as the International Co-Prosecutor of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia from July 2019 until July 2022, having been the Reserve International Co-Prosecutor from April 2015. Prior to her appointment as the ECCC’s International Co-Prosecutor, she was the Prosecutor of both the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (2010–2019). After serving as a legal consultant to the SCSL Prosecutor in 2002, 2003 and 2006, in February 2007 she became lead prosecutor in the case against former Liberian President, Charles Taylor and continued to lead the prosecution of that case until the appeal was concluded in 2013.

From 1994 to 2001, Ms. Hollis held various positions in the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, including that of Co-Counsel in the Duško Tadić case, the first litigated case in an international criminal tribunal since the Nuremberg trials, lead prosecutor in both the reopening of the Furundžija case, in which rape was charged as torture, and the preparatory stage of the case against former Serbian President Slobodan Milošević. Ms. Hollis has trained judges, prosecutors, and investigators in Cambodia, Indonesia, and Iraq. She also assisted victims of international crimes in Colombia and in the Democratic Republic of Congo to prepare submissions requesting investigations by the International Criminal Court. Before entering the international arena, Ms. Hollis was a US Peace Corps volunteer in West Africa, and served as an officer in the US Air Force, initially as an Air Intelligence Briefing Officer and then as a Judge Advocate, the latter primarily as a prosecutor at the trial and appellate level, retiring with the rank of Colonel.

The post 2025 ABILA Award Winners appeared first on ABILA.

The American Branch is proud to announce this year’s Emerging Voices. This year saw a record number of applicants, making the selection process incredibly difficult. Thank you to the 2025 Emerging Voices Selection Committee: Christine Carpenter, Lisa Reinsberg, and Alveena Shah. The selection committee will work with the successful applicants in the lead up to International Law Weekend to polish and perfect their research papers.

The Silicon Valley Community Foundation generously funds the Emerging Voices program. Their sponsorship ensures young voices have the means to travel to New York City and present their innovative works.

Kazım Berkay Arslan is an Associate with Kabine Law Office in Istanbul, Türkiye, where he focuses on commercial and investment arbitration. He holds an LLM from Harvard Law School, where he was a Fulbright Scholar, and an LLB from Galatasaray University, Türkiye. His research paper is titled ‘Foregrounding Local Community Perspectives in Investment Arbitration.’

Annika Knauer is a Research Fellow and PhD Candidate at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law Heidelberg, Germany. Starting August 2025, she will be a Visiting Fellow at Columbia Law School. She holds a law degree from Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, where she specialized in public international law and European law. Knauer’s research paper is titled ‘Disinformation: Gendered and Violent.’

Emmanuel O. Osayande is a dual JD Candidate at Columbia Law School and a PhD Candidate in History and African Studies at Harvard University. He holds an MA in History from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he was a Mellon Scholar, and a BA in History and Strategic Studies from the University of Lagos, Nigeria. His research paper is titled ‘Justice Transferred: Strategic Litigation on Climate Change at Africa’s International Courts.’

Naida Softić is a PhD candidate in Political Science and Teaching Instructor at Loyola University, Chicago. She holds a Bachelor of Laws from the University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. She also works with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) on legislative and policy guidance concerning cross-border responses to migrant smuggling and trafficking in persons in several West African countries. Her research paper is titled ‘Mandate at the Margins: Crisis, Refusal, and Legal Accountability in Migration Governance.’

The 2025 Emerging Voices will present their work at the New York City Bar Association on Thursday, October 23rd, 2025, at 4:00 PM, immediately preceding the International Law Weekend Opening Plenary with Elinor Hammarskjöld. Purchase tickets to International Law Weekend here.

The post Announcing: 2025 Emerging Voices appeared first on ABILA.

International Law Chats is a podcast from the American Branch of the International Law Association (ABILA), hosted by Professor Chiara Giorgetti, Alison Macdonald KC, and Professor Milena Sterio. Episodes air on the first Monday of every month and will feature prominent guests in the field of international law. Episodes will be available on Spotify, YouTube, and our website.

Chiara and Milena interviewed our Chair, Leila Nadya Sadat, about her longstanding efforts to establish a treaty on Crimes Against Humanity.

Professor ⁠Leila Nadya Sadat⁠ is the James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law at Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. Professor Sadat has served as Special Adviser on Crimes Against Humanity to the International Criminal Court Prosecutor from 2012-2023, and is one of the world’s foremost authorities in the fields of public international law, international criminal law, human rights, and foreign affairs.

Listen to the fourth episode below and subscribe to International Law Chats on Spotify and YouTube.

The post International Law Chats Ep. 4 – A New International Treaty on Crimes Against Humanity? with Leila Nadya Sadat appeared first on ABILA.

Deadline: July 6, 2025

This October 23-25, the American Branch will present International Law Weekend (ILW) 2025 in New York City. This two-and-a-half-day conference features over 30 panels, and many of the world’s leading international lawyers and diplomats participate. Recent ILWs have attracted an audience of over 1,200 practitioners, academics, U.N. diplomats, business leaders, federal and state government officials, NGO leaders, journalists, students, and interested citizens. ILW makes particular efforts to include emerging scholars and practitioners, including through the Emerging Voices panel.

ILW 2025 Theme: Crisis as Catalyst in International Law

ILW 2025 will explore how crises can serve as transformative moments that challenge and reshape the framework of international law.  Whether political, environmental, economic, or humanitarian, crises compel local, regional, and global actors to confront the limitations of extant legal systems. By serving as catalysts for innovation, crises also provide opportunities to reevaluate and reconstruct international legal norms. This process highlights the dynamic nature of international law, which must balance its foundational principles with the need for flexibility in response to unprecedented events. ILW 2025 encourages participants to reimagine international law.

Call for Abstracts

The ILW Organizing Committee invites the submission of abstracts relating to the theme of “Crisis as Catalyst in International Law.”  We will select several abstracts for presentation at ILW 2025 as part of a panel of new and emerging professionals. The abstracts may be based upon ongoing work. While all submissions are welcome, preference will be given to papers not already published. Accepted applicants will be invited to present their papers at the Emerging Voices Panel, which a scholar or practitioner will chair. Participation must be in-person, other than in exceptional circumstances.

Eligibility is restricted to applicants who are current graduate students (master’s, PhD, JD, etc.) or junior scholars or professionals who have been working in the field of international law for five years or fewer. Accepted applicants are required to join ABILA and register for ILW 2025 (both are free to students, and otherwise carry a total fee of $70 for new members). Panelists are encouraged to attend other panels, plenary sessions, and to take part in the Members Meeting and networking events.

Application & Funding

The submission deadline is July 6, 2025. Submissions should be sent to ilw@ila-americanbranch.org with the subject line “Emerging Voices – ILW 2025.” Applicants must submit all of the following in a single PDF document:

– A 500 word abstract of their paper;

– A cover letter: describing their professional development and explaining how their submission fits with the conference theme, and,

– A curriculum vitae of no more than 3 pages.

Submissions will be competitively selected in a peer review process.  Applicants will be notified by July 25, 2025.

If accepted, paper drafts from all panelists will be due for review by panel discussants no later than September 25, 2025.

ABILA has secured funding to provide need-based reimbursement of Emerging Voices panelists’ travel and hotel costs, insofar as those costs are not covered by their institutions. The reimbursement limit is $1,500 for panelists traveling from within North America, and $2,500 for those traveling from elsewhere. Panelists seeking reimbursement will be asked to submit their receipts.

Travel

ABILA is not able to provide general immigration support, but is available to provide letters of support as needed for visa applications.

Questions may also be submitted to: ilw@ila-americanbranch.org.

2024 Emerging Voices

The post Emerging Voices 2025 Panel – Call for Submissions appeared first on ABILA.

In honor of ILW 2025’s theme of ‘Crisis as Catalyst,’ ABILA is hosting its next blogging symposium with the International Humanitarian Law Committee. Previous symposia have been sponsored by the International Environmental and Energy Law Committee (see here) and the International Investment Law Committee (see here). Editors for this Symposium are Professor Gabor Rona, Anne Harper, and Freya Doughty-Wagner.

Crisis as Catalyst in International Law:

“ILW 2025 will explore how crises can serve as transformative moments that challenge and reshape the framework of international law.  Whether political, environmental, economic, or humanitarian, crises compel local, regional, and global actors to confront the limitations of extant legal systems. By serving as catalysts for innovation, crises also provide opportunities to reevaluate and reconstruct international legal norms. This process highlights the dynamic nature of international law, which must balance its foundational principles with the need for flexibility in response to unprecedented events. ILW 2025 encourages participants to reimagine international law.”

Crisis as Catalyst in International Humanitarian Law lends itself to many blog themes. These may include, but are not limited to:

– Regulation of private military companies;

– The obligation to apply legal advice to targeting decisions, in light of the firing of TJAGs;

– Secretary Hegseth’s “War on Warriors” effect on IHL compliance;

– A review of status of Additional Protocols;

– International Criminal Court sanctions;

– Enforcement of Leahy Laws and the “ensure respect” obligation of the Geneva Conventions;

– The effect of US sanctions on engagement with armed groups;

– Artificial intelligence and accountability;

– Humanitarian action/obligations and principles;

– Occupation vs Annexation;

– Challenges to the implementation of principles of distinction and proportionality in modern warfare;

– Detention and trial by non-state armed groups;

– Accountability challenges relating to drones and other forms of remote targeting;

– Obligations in the development of new weapons technology;

– Enhancing accountability through the new Ljubljana/The Hague Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance.

To participate, kindly submit a 200-word abstract and a brief biography to Freya Doughty-Wagner at media@ila-americanbranch.org by June 27, 2025. Abstracts and biographies may be in Word or PDF format. Please include the phrase ‘blog symposium’ in the email’s subject line. Abstracts must address the ILW 2025 theme from an international humanitarian law perspective.

Five abstracts will be selected. Submissions may come from law students, academics, or practitioners. Undergraduates are not able to apply at this time. Blogs may not be cross-posted to other blogging platforms.

Successful applicants will be notified by July 10, 2025, and requested to prepare a 1,500-word first draft with hyperlinks as references and an attached open-access image by July 31, 2025. All blogs may undergo editing, subject to author approval, before publication. We anticipate posting the edited, complete blogs to our website and across our social media the week of August 25, 2025. The best blog will also be included in our biannual print newsletter.

The post Blogging Symposium: Crisis as Catalyst – An International Humanitarian Law Perspective appeared first on ABILA.

International Law Chats is a podcast from the American Branch of the International Law Association (ABILA), hosted by Professor Chiara Giorgetti, Alison Macdonald KC, and Professor Milena Sterio. Episodes air on the first Monday of every month and will feature prominent guests in the field of international law. Episodes will be available on Spotify, YouTube, and our website.

Chiara, Alison, and Milena sat down with Amb. Namira Negm and Tafadzwa Pasipanodya at the American Society of International Law’s Annual Meeting to discuss the importance of African practice in international law.

Amb. Negm is the first Director of the African Migration Observatory and Honorary President of the African Society for International Law. She is a Visiting Professor at the Geneva Summer School in International Law and International Humanitarian Law (Geneva University) and was the first female Legal Counsel of the African Union.

Tafadzwa Pasipanodya is a partner in Foley Hoag’s international litigation and arbitration department and chairs the firm’s Africa practice group. For almost two decades, she has represented sovereign States from all over the world in investor-state arbitrations concerning natural resources, mining, the environment, infrastructure, and health policy before arbitration tribunals.

Listen to the third episode below and subscribe to International Law Chats on Spotify and YouTube.

The post International Law Chats Ep. 3 – Africa Popularis with Amb. Namira Negm and Tafadzwa Pasipanodya appeared first on ABILA.