Summary
This video features the 2026 White & Case Jessup Cup World Championship match between the National University of Singapore (Applicant) and Ateneo de Manila University (Respondent). The proceedings cover the Intervention of Selenia, the consultation rights of the Piliman people, the extradition of Ms. Liss Scott involving the 'ne bis in idem' principle, and the state immunity of a state-owned enterprise, Nexca. Following legal arguments, the event honors Jessup alumni and retiring leaders before announcing the National University of Singapore as the world champion and Tan Kai Han as the best oralist.
Key Insights
The legal standard for third-party intervention under Article 62 of the ICJ Statute requires a concrete legal interest that may be affected.
The Applicant argues that Selenia has a legitimate legal interest in intervening due to the customary international law rights of its Piliman citizens and identical treaty provisions in the Selenia-Rostovia Plateau Agreement. They contend that the threshold for 'may be affected' is low and that interpreting one treaty necessarily influences the interpretation of another with identical text and purpose. The Respondent counters that intervention is speculative and that the principle of res inter alios acta, protected by Article 59, ensures that a decision between Alacostia and Rostovia does not legally bind or prejudice Selenia's separate bilateral rights.
Customary international law regarding indigenous consultation is framed as an obligation of conduct (good faith) rather than a right of veto.
The dispute centers on whether Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) requires actual consent or merely a good-faith process. The Applicant asserts that Rostovia failed to provide accessible information and failed to conduct genuine dialogues aimed at obtaining consent, citing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Respondent argues that FPIC, as reflected in the practice of over 90 states, is a procedural requirement to allow influence on the outcome, not a veto power, and that Rostovia satisfied this by hosting numerous forums and incorporating community recommendations into the project's technical requirements.
State immunity for separate entities depends on the distinction between sovereign acts (jure imperii) and commercial acts (jure gestionis).
The debate on Nexca's immunity hinges on whether its exploration activities in the Gordian Gorge were sovereign or commercial. The Applicant uses a 'nature and purpose' test, arguing that the mining of rare earth minerals for national security and emerging industries constitutes an exercise of sovereign authority. The Respondent emphasizes the 'nature' test, arguing that entering a competitive bidding process for mining is inherently a commercial transaction. Furthermore, they discuss the 'territorial tort exception', which may strip immunity when a state entity causes personal injury or death within the forum state's territory.
Sections
Applicant's Arguments: Intervention and Consultation
The Applicant asserts Selenia's right to intervene as a non-party under Article 62 of the court's statute.
Phoebe Chan argues that Selenia meets the three conditions for intervention: a legal interest in customary international law regarding the Piliman people, an interest in the identical terms of the Selenia-Rostovia Plateau Agreement, and a proper object of intervention to protect its citizens' rights.
Alacostia claims Rostovia breached treaty and customary law by failing to obtain the Piliman people's free, prior, and informed consent.
The Applicant contends that the consultation process was flawed because Rostovia overloaded elders with technical documents, provided insufficient time for dialogue, and failed to genuinely aim for consent before awarding a contract to a developer the community opposed.
Applicant's Arguments: Extradition and State Immunity
The Applicant argues that 'ne bis in idem' is a general principle of law barring the extradition of Ms. Liss Scott.
Tan Kai Han asserts that double jeopardy is a common principle across domestic legal systems and is transposable to international law. She claims Ms. Scott was already tried on the merits in Alacostia for the same conduct, and a second trial in Rostovia would violate this universal legal protection.
Alacostia maintains that Nexca is entitled to state immunity for its sovereign mining exploration activities in the gorge.
The Applicant argues that Nexca's acts were attributable to the state and served a public purpose related to national security and resource management. They also argue the 'territorial tort exception' does not apply because the alleged negligence occurred in Alacostia, not Rostovia.
Respondent's Arguments: Opposing Intervention and Defending Consultation
The Respondent argues that Selenia's request to intervene is speculative and would introduce an unnecessary second dispute.
Jose Andres Gonzalez contends that the interest in the formation of general customary law is insufficient for intervention. He argues that separate bilateral treaties are governed by their own unique contexts and that Article 59 of the Statute protects Selenia from the legal effects of the current ruling.
Rostovia defends its consultation process as a good-faith effort that satisfies both treaty and customary law frameworks.
The Respondent claims that consent is not a veto and that the state successfully enabled the Piliman people to influence the project. They highlight that 120 elders supported the project and that the state modified engineering plans to avoid using explosives or building roads, directly reflecting community input.
Respondent's Arguments: Denying Immunity and Demanding Extradition
The Respondent claims 'ne bis in idem' lacks the commonality required to be considered a general principle of international law.
Juan Guzman Lema points to the fundamental lack of harmony between civil and common law systems regarding the finality of acquittals and whether the principle applies to identical conduct or identical crimes. He argues states only recognize transnational double jeopardy when explicitly consented to via treaty.
Rostovia asserts that Nexca's activities were commercial and that the territorial tort exception removes any claim to immunity.
The Respondent argues that as a state-owned entity, Nexca is presumed to perform commercial functions. They contend that a site survey for mining costs is a 'jure gestionis' act and that the death of a Rostovian citizen on Rostovian soil justifies the application of the territorial tort exception to ensure access to justice.
ILSA Speeches and the Future of Jessup
Steven Schneebaum delivers a moving retirement speech regarding the importance of the rule of law in modern times.
The retiring ILSA Chair reflects on the growing threats to international law and the role of Jessup students as the 'reinforcements' in the battle for justice. He emphasizes that despite global conflicts and shifting geopolitical tides, the dedication shown by competitors provides a necessary foundation for hope.
The topics for the 2027 Jessup Problem are officially announced, focusing on modern humanitarian and technological issues.
The upcoming problem will address gender apartheid, mass migration and asylum responses, sanctions generated by artificial intelligence, and the legal status of a government following a coup d'état.
Final Results and Awards
Professor Ximena Fuentes receives the 2026 White & Case Distinguished Jessup Alumni Award for her diplomatic career.
Fuentes, a former competitor from Chile, is honored for her extensive service as an agent before the ICJ and as an ambassador. In a video message, she credits Jessup for teaching her that a good lawyer requires creativity, imagination, and interest in the human condition.
The National University of Singapore is crowned the World Champion after a highly competitive final round evaluation.
The judges praise both teams for demonstrating advocacy skills superior to many practicing lawyers. Tan Kai Han is named the best oralist of the round, and the National University of Singapore is declared the overall winner for the Applicant side.
Ask a Question
*Uses 1 Wisdom coin from your coin balance