On 10 November 2023, WilmerHale and the Institute for Integrated Transitions (“IFIT”) co-hosted a one-day high-level convening on IFIT’s Peace Treaty Initiative at WilmerHale’s London office.  WilmerHale Partners Gary Born, Steven Finizio, and Associate Maria Camila Hoyos organized and participated in the event.

There currently is no international legal framework for resolving intra-state armed conflicts, which presents significant challenges for negotiators. To fill this gap, the Peace Treaty Initiative is a global undertaking to establish a multilateral treaty that incentivizes parties to violent conflicts to opt for negotiation. Supported by a distinguished Expert Advisory Group and by the Law and Peace Practice Group, the Peace Treaty Initiative has developed a draft Convention on Conflict Prevention and Resolution.  The draft Convention is in the last stage of a worldwide substantive consultation process before moving into a more political phase en route to a future diplomatic conference of states.

The event gathered highly experienced global experts on peace negotiation, international arbitration, international humanitarian law, human rights law, and international criminal law to discuss the draft Convention from different perspectives.  In addition to the WilmerHale participants, attendees included:

• Shaharzad Akbar (Rawadari, Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, IFIT’s International Advisory Council)
• Ambassador Roy Barreras (Embassy of Colombia in the UK)
• Niuscha Bassiri (Hanotiau & van den Berg)
• Professor Petra Butler (University of Canterbury, Kate Sheppard Chambers)
• Mariana Casij (IFIT)
• Professor Phil Clark (SOAS University London, IFIT’s Law and Peace Practice Group)
• Ian S. Forrester (General Court of the European Union 2015-2020)
• Mark Freeman (IFIT)
• Lord (Peter) Goldsmith KC (Debevoise & Plimpton)
• Sergio Jaramillo (European Institute of Peace in Brussels, Negotiations Strategies Institute in East Jerusalem)
• Philip McDonagh (IFIT’s International Advisory Council)
• Alvaro Nistal (Arnold & Porter)
• Professor Sarah Nouwen (European University Institute, IFIT’s Expert Advisory Group of the Peace Treaty Initiative)
• Professor Emilia Onyema (SOAS Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Centre)
• Dr. Asli Ozcelik Olcay (University of Glasgow, IFIT’s Law and Peace Practice Group)
• Professor Dr. Brendan Plant (Twenty Essex, University of Cambridge)
• Professor Dan Sarooshi KC (Essex Court Chambers, University of Oxford)
• Jeremy X. Wilson (Covington & Burling)
• Hesham Youssef (IFIT’s Expert Advisory Group of the Peace Treaty Initiative)
• Angela Zollinger (Embassy of Switzerland in the UK).

Discussions focused on three themes: (i) the draft Convention’s premises, vision, and process; (ii) the role of international arbitration in preventing and resolving armed conflicts; and (iii) how the practical, political, substantive, and institutional development of international arbitration can contribute to the draft Convention.

The draft Convention seeks to provide negotiators with a clear legal framework for intra-state negotiations and to decrease the risk of negotiating during non-international armed conflicts.  Participants exchanged ideas on how international arbitration potentially fits into the broader spectrum of dispute resolution under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, which provides that UN members must seek pacific settlement of disputes, including through mediation and arbitration.  Among other things, participants discussed both the opportunities and limitations of using international arbitration to help resolve disputes involving sub-state entities in intra-state territorial conflicts, including lessons from the Abyei arbitration between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (for more information about the Abyei arbitration see here).

In the context of intra-state armed conflicts, participants discussed whether arbitration could provide a credible and neutral alternative where a party does not trust national courts due to a perceived bias or when they lack access to the International Court of Justice.  Participants also considered whether a tailored arbitration process might provide useful tools under the draft Convention, for example, with regard to fact-finding or deciding questions of international law within a larger negotiation context.  Participants also drew on lessons from the Colombian peace process and discussed how issues of confidentiality and transparency, as well as enforcement and compliance with decisions, are addressed in international arbitration.

More information is available about the draft Convention on Conflict Prevention and Resolution and the Peace Treaty Initiative at https://ifit-transitions.org/peace-treaty-initiative/