I have written previously about Jessup and my experiences of the competition, which you can read here and here. This year I participated as a judge. I therefore wanted to write from the other side of the bench, so that competitors can understand what judges look for and improve their scores.
Know the case inside out
Judges want you to have a firm command of the problem. You should be able to recall its important passages and refer to the relevant paragraph numbers. Read it every day: in a word, absorb it. But do not build your entire submission around the facts. Judges want to see your command of the law, even if they occasionally test your knowledge of the case.
The agreed facts and the compromis are not interchangeable terms. Confusing them can cost you marks from the outset.
Master the treaties and case law
Have you identified all the treaties relevant to your arguments? How well do you know the cases? With their civil law background, Iranian students often rely too little on judicial decisions. Perhaps that partly explains our limited success in the international rounds. Start with the treaties, then use case law to demonstrate your understanding.
Sometimes a competitor argues that a treaty rule has become customary international law. A judge’s first question will be: on what basis? Does a treaty become customary law simply because 150 states have signed it?
Judges also have a bench memorandum summarising the problem, dates and legal authorities. How far the competitors engage with those authorities matters to the assessment.
Answer the question
Judges have different personalities, but the purpose of their challenges is generally to test your knowledge. First understand the question; then address it directly. Going off on a tangent rarely helps. It wastes your time and is unlikely to impress the bench.
Be professional
I will not dwell on this, since your coach has probably already covered it. Stay within the expected formal framework, and ask the judge’s permission before returning to your submissions.
Manage your time
If you face a hot bench—judges who ask many questions—you may not have time for every argument. Which one will you sacrifice?
If you face a cold bench, do you have enough material to use your allotted time?
Prepare several strategies and practise them all. Do not forget to state the relief you seek at the end. One of the biggest mistakes is to use all your time arguing one submission and leave yourself too little for the next.
Coordinate with your teammate
It is unlikely that you will be asked to explain the previous speaker’s argument. But if your teammate says a treaty is invalid or terminated and you then rely on it, a judge will ask which position is correct. If that treaty is invalid, what is the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction? Your arguments must fit together.
Postscript: Once you have participated as a judge, you can no longer take part as a competitor.
This essay reflects the author’s experience and understanding at its original publication on 24 February 2023.