Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


INTERESTED IN wRITING FOR tHE rOUNDTABLE?

An Unlikely Success:  The Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal

4/15/2015

1 Comment

 
Picture
By Sebastian Bates

Sebastian Bates is a first-year law student at Keble College, Oxford University. 

As the month of March drew to a close, the eyes of the world turned towards Lausanne, Switzerland, where negotiations to draft an accord that would limit the Iranian nuclear program were extended. Reports claimed that the atmosphere of the talks had been tense – France had been become increasingly hawkish and the Iranian representatives ever-more intransigent as the March 31st deadline came and went. However, the talks were not without an element of collegiality. Both the American Secretary of Energy, Ernest J. Moniz, and the senior Iranian nuclear scientist, Ali Akbar Salehi, spent time teaching or studying at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and apparently developed a good rapport.

No such warmth existed the last time the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America met for such widely‐publicized diplomatic talks. In 1980, then‐Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher led a delegation to Algiers to “resolve the crisis in relations” between the two countries “arising out of the November 1979 hostage crisis.” [1] On January 19, 1981, this delegation and its Iranian counterpart signed the Algiers Accords, which established the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal. [2] The Accords assigned the Tribunal “the enormous task of adjudicating disputes involving billions of dollars in commercial debts, breached contracts, nationalizations, expropriations and other measures affecting property rights.” [3]
On occasion, the tumult of the Tribunal’s origin seems to resurface as tensions boil over. For instance, while reports in the first year of its existence claimed that there “exist[ed] a friendly atmosphere on the Tribunal which facilitate[d] its work,” a “great sense of frustration” soon developed due to the Tribunal’s slow pace. [4] In 1984, the air of frustration inspired physical violence when two Iranian arbitrators, Mahmoud Kashani and Shafei Shafeiei, “grabbed” their Swedish colleague Nils Mangård’s collar and “pummeled [him] on the back.” [5] Judge Kashani went on to threaten that “[i]f Mangård ever dares to enter the tribunal chamber again, either his corpse or my corpse will leave it rolling down the stairs.” [6]

Despite the context in which it was created, coupled with its acrimonious beginnings in The Hague, the Tribunal has managed to weather all controversies thus far. Now, over thirty years later, it remains an active body – rather surprisingly, in light of the fact that “[c]laims had to be filed with the Tribunal by 19 January 1982, and their number is therefore finite.” [7] Its structure remains unchanged: it is made up of three Iranian arbitrators, three American arbitrators, and three arbitrators from other countries. [8] The six arbitrators from the US and Iran choose the three third‐country arbitrators, one of whom they select to act as the President of the Tribunal. [9] If the six original arbitrators cannot agree on the appointment of third‐country arbitrators or of the President, then the Secretary-General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration may engage an Appointing Authority to fill the vacancies. [10] Cases are generally heard by a Chamber comprised of one Iranian arbitrator, one American arbitrator, and a third‐country arbitrator acting as Chairman. In cases of particular importance, or in which the United States and Iran are parties, the Full Chamber of all nine Tribunal members will sit in judgment. [11]

According to reports, “[t]he Tribunal's Iranian judges passionately advance Iran's positions in virtually every Tribunal case,” and the American judges also occasionally engage in such “gamesmanship.” Consequently, the third‐country arbitrators play a vital role in ensuring the fairness of the Tribunal’s judgments, which cannot be appealed (though they may be amended by the Tribunal itself). [12] In addition to the possibility of partiality, the fact that all “private claims relating to the seizure and detention of the American hostages or the occupation of the American Embassy in Tehran are excluded” from hearings under the Algiers Accord continues to spark controversy. [13]

Nevertheless, the Tribunal has been recognized by many as “the most significant arbitral body in history; its awards, a gold mine of information for perceptive lawyers.” [14] It represents “one of the most ambitious and complex international claims adjudication programs ever undertaken,” and is consequently an important source of insight into the arbitral process. [15] (It also happens to be “the first mixed claims commission in which the United States has participated since World War II.” [16]) The Tribunal’s major achievement is generally seen to be the “the establishment of [its] rules” based on those of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. [17] There is great significance to having a “substantial body of case law interpreting, applying, and even supplementing” the UNICTRAL rules. [18] It is important to note that the Tribunal has somewhat adapted UNICTRAL’s rules, which were drafted with only a single case in mind. [19] However, these were only “slightly modified,” so that the “interpretations and applications” of the rules by the Tribunal remain broadly relevant. Even the alterations may “amount to improvements or clarifications,” meriting widespread adoption. [20] Some arbitrators, however, believe that the “decisions of the Tribunal, although on point, [are] not persuasive because the Tribunal, after all, involves a special type of arbitration” in light of its unique and tumultuous history. [21] However, this view is not widely held.

Alongside the example set by the diplomats in Lausanne, the success of the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal in the decades since the Algiers Accord is important for students of international law, and particularly international arbitration, to consider. Despite its slow pace and intermittent internal conflict, the Tribunal has provided a forum in which disputes between Iran, the United States, and nationals of both countries may be resolved peacefully. In addition, it has provided a valuable body of case law that shall remain relevant long after the final case is heard and the Tribunal itself is dissolved. The liberation of the American diplomats held in Tehran has traditionally been seen as a great achievement of the era. It is time for the Tribunal, too, to be seen as a great triumph.


[1] Iran‐United States Claims Arbitration Tribunal, “About the Tribunal,” https://www.iusct.net/Pages/Public/A‐About.aspx
[2] Ibid. 
[3] Davis R. Robinson, “Recent Development at the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal,” 17 The International Lawyer 661.
[4] Arthur Rovine, “Remarks on the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal,” 76 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law 1, 5.
[5] Nicholas D. Kristof, “A Slow Pace for Iran Claims,” New York Times, November 14, 1984.
[6] UPI, “Around the World: Iranian Judge Threatens a Swede at The Hague,” New York Times, September 7, 1984
[7] “About the Tribunal.”
[8] Jamison M. Selby, “State Responsibility and the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal,” 83 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law 240.
[9] City of The Hague, ‘The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal’ (City of The Hague: The Hague, 2008), 2.
[10] Charles N. Brower and Jason D. Brueschke, The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: The Hague, 1998), 154.
[11] City of The Hague, Tribunal, 2.
[12] Nancy Amoury Combs, “Profile: Judge George H. Aldrich,” http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/35.
[13] S.H. Amin, “Iran‐United States Claims Settlement,” 32 The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 750.
[14] David D. Caron, “The Nature of the Iran‐United States Claims Tribunal and the Evolving Structure of International Dispute Resolution,” 84 The American Journal of International Law 104 (internal citations omitted).
[15] Robinson, “Recent Developments,” 661.
[16] Ibid at 662.
[17] Rovine, “Remarks,” 1.
[18] Brower and Brueschke, Tribunal, 19.
[19] Rrovine, “Remarks,” 1.
[20] Brower and Brueschke, Tribunal, 19.
[21] Caron, “Nature,” 104.

Photo Credit: Flickr User Joe Gratz
1 Comment
Sabeeh Al-Khayyat
4/10/2017 03:51:00 pm

I was looking for a justification as to why international law—which on occasion has its failures (most notably with the South China Sea arbitration)—has succeeded in this instance. But it is very reassuring that international law is far from obsolete, even when it involves a delicate cocktail of politics and law. Excellent article!

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Ella Sohn
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Harshit Rai
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Pheby Liu
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    March 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Picture
Picture
​