PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF LANCE PAUL LARSEN

Similar documents
PCA CASE NO

DAVID KEANU SAI, PH.D.

Procedural Order No. 3

Award FINRA Office of Dispute Resolution

VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: PROTEST AND DEMAND Alleged War Criminal: Judge PATRICK H. BORDER War Crime Victim: Maltbie Napoleon

PCA Case No

DAVID AVEN ET AL. V. THE REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA (UNCT/15/3) PROCEDURAL ORDER NO 2. On the Respondent s Request for Bifurcation

ANSWER TO THE REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION [NOTE: OR ANSWER TO THE REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION AND COUNTERCLAIMS, IF

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES. Gabriel Resources Ltd. and Gabriel Resources (Jersey) Ltd. Romania

Rules Of Arbitration Of The Alternative Dispute Resolution Tribunal Of The Bar Association Of Nassau County, N.Y., Inc.

REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION

IN THE HON BLE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, HEGUE IN THE MATTER OF (AEGEAN SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF CASE) GREECE... APPELLANT TURKEY...

CHAPTER 9 INVESTMENT. Section A

PAMS ARBITRATION RULES

The court may allow a witness to give evidence through a video link or by other

DR. DAVID KEANU SAI Ambassador-at-large for the Hawaiian Kingdom P.O. Box 2194 Honolulu, HI

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL COMPLAINT

Marvin Roy Feldman Karpa. United Mexican States. (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/1) Interim Decision on. Preliminary Jurisdictional Issues

HAWAI I COUNTY COUNCIL

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Washington, D.C. In the proceedings between

NFA Arbitration: Resolving Customer Disputes

Award FINRA Office of Dispute Resolution

ANSWER TO THE NOTICE OF ARBITRATION [NOTE: OR ANSWER TO THE NOTICE OF ARBITRATION AND COUNTERCLAIMS, IF

JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF THE STATE

NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES. ACP Axos Capital GmbH. Republic of Kosovo PROCEDURAL ORDER NO. 3

INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW OF THE SEA

RULES FOR ARBITRATION BETWEEN THE BANK FOR INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS AND PRIVATE PARTIES

PRACTICE STATEMENT FRESH CLAIM JUDICIAL REVIEWS IN THE IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL ON OR AFTER 29 APRIL 2013

RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION [NOTE: OR RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION AND COUNTERCLAIMS, IF

1 WAITE AND KENNEDY v. GERMANY JUDGMENT CASE OF WAITE AND KENNEDY v. GERMANY. (Application no /94) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 18 February 1999

THE ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) ACT,

AND CHAPTER ELEVEN OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT ( NAFTA ) PROCEDURAL ORDER ON TWO DISPUTED ISSUES DATED 6 FEBRUARY 2015 (English Text)

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Washington, D.C. Tokios Tokelės (Claimant) v. Ukraine (Respondent) Case No.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES. Claimant. Respondent. (ICSID Case No. ARB/xx/xxx) [DRAFT] PROCEDURAL ORDER NO.

ORDER NO September 2010

PCA Case Nº IN THE MATTER OF THE ARCTIC SUNRISE ARBITRATION. - before -

CHAIR S DIRECTIONS (for Standard Dwellinghouse claims)

113th Session Judgment No. 3136

PART 8 ARBITRATION REGULATIONS CONTENTS

NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

JAMS International Arbitration Rules & Procedures

Case 1:10-mc JDB Document 3-3 Filed 05/06/10 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT 3

PCA Case No

AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION

THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT. Before the Tribunal constituted by. Mr Christopher Jeans QC, President; Mr David Goddard QC, member; and

ICC Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration 1975

ARBITRATION RULES. Arbitration Rules Archive. 1. Agreement of Parties

6.1 Part not to apply in certain cases (16.1, PD 16) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), this Part, except (a) rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.9 and 6.

The Ongoing Illegal War between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America since 1893

NASSAU COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION PANELS ARBITRATION RULES

Affidavit of Rebuttal of Clark County Tax Lien Against David A. Darby. Affidavit of Fact

LOCAL ARBITRATION MOOT COMPETITION 2017 PROCEDURAL RULES. TITLE I General Rules

CHAPTER EIGHT INVESTMENT. Section A Investment. 1. This Chapter shall apply to measures adopted or maintained by a Party relating to:

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 03 September 2014 On 03 October Before. The President, The Hon. Mr Justice McCloskey. Between ECO (MANILA)

DUBAI INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE RULES 2007 AS OF 22 ND FEBRUARY Introductory Provisions. Article (1) Definitions

1. Please indicate the nature of the initial claim that was filed. Note: AP is the abbreviation for Associated Person. Member vs.

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES. Eco Oro Minerals Corp. Republic of Colombia. (ICSID Case No.

ICC/CMI Rules International Maritime Arbitration Organization in force as from 1 January 1978

REQUEST FOR ARBITRATION

The Rules of the Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Serbia

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 02/16/ :13 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 59 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/16/2017

ADGM COURTS PRACTICE DIRECTION 4

ERITREA ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION RULES OF PROCEDURE CHAPTER ONE: RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL PROCEEDINGS

PCA Case No

Effective Date: October 2, 2006 Property Subrogation Arbitration

DAVID KEANU SAI, PH.D. Acting Ambassador-at-large for the Hawaiian Kingdom P.O. Box 2194 Honolulu, HI

2012 ICC Rules 1998 ICC Rules. Article 1

David Keanu Sai, Ph.D. 16 October Ambassador-at-Large. P.O. Box 2194 Honolulu, HI

Model Rules on Arbitral Procedure 1958

Submitted by: Joseph Frank Adam [represented by counsel]

- and - IN THE ARBITRATION UNDER CHAPTER TEN OF THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC CENTRAL AMERICA UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT PAC RIM CAYMAN LLC,

FINAL JUDGMENT OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING (AFTER NOTICE)

STATUTE OF THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

PART 2 MATRIMONIAL PROCEEDINGS

RULES OF THE INDEPENDENT ARBITRATION SCHEME FOR THE GLASS & GLAZING INDUSTRY September 2015 Edition

GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE BY-LAW TABLE OF CONTENTS

Procedural Order No 21. Procedural Order No 21 (Procedure on further document production, privilege claims and related matters)

QUESTIONNAIRE ON JURA NOVIT CURIA

NAM EMPLOYMENT RULES AND PROCEDURES DEMAND FOR ARBITRATION/ARBITRATION REQUEST FORM FOR EMPLOYEES

REQUEST FOR THE PRESCRIPTION OF PROVISIONAL MEASURES SUBMITTED BY SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

No FRANCE and NEW ZEALAND. Supplementary Agreement relating to an arbitral tribunal. Signed at New York on 14 February 1989

Operate the recorder. There are no off the record conversations between the parties and yourself. Record the entire proceeding!

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTORY RULES...

ICDR/AAA EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Annex I Arbitration Rules

8 NYCRR 83 This document reflects those changes received from the NY Bill Drafting Commission through June 27, 2014

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 1986

CHAPTER 9 INVESTMENT. Section A: Investment

SECTION A. Investment Protection. Article 9.1. Definitions

TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST STALKING

NAM EMPLOYMENT RULES AND PROCEDURES DEMAND FOR ARBITRATION/ARBITRATION REQUEST FORM FOR EMPLOYEES OF TA OPERATING LLC, D/B/A MINIT MART

SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES

Objections Not Possessing an Exclusively Preliminary Character in the South China Sea Arbitration

Russian Federation arbitration proceeding 155/2003 of 16 March 2005

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION-MIDDLESEX/OCEAN COUNTIES URBAN LEAGUE OF GREATER NEW BRUNSWICK, et al. f

ARBITRATION RULES OF THE SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE SIAC RULES (5 TH EDITION, 1 APRIL 2013)

AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION OPINION AND AWARD. auspices of the American Arbitration Association to render an Opinion and Award in its case

MUTUAL OPERATIONS PROTOCOL FOR ENFORCING GOVERNING DOCUMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS

Unofficial Consolidated Text. of the Brussels Supplementary Convention Incorporating the Provisions of the Three Amending Protocols Referred to Above

Award FINRA Dispute Resolution. Claimant Case Number: Karl Austin Pettijohn REPRESENTATION OF PARTIES

Transcription:

PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION LANCE PAUL LARSEN, CLAIMANT VS. THE HAWAIIAN KINGDOM, RESPONDENT COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF LANCE PAUL LARSEN 23 JUNE 2000

COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF LANCE PAUL LARSEN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION A. The Issues Before the Arbitral Tribunal B. Summary of Claimant s Argument C. Summary of Respondent s Argument D. Procedural Statement Part One CLAIMANT S RESPONSE TO THE MEMORIAL OF THE HAWAIIAN KINGDOM CHAPTER I ISSUES AGREED UPON BY THE PARTIES CHAPTER II ISSUE IN DISPUTE: RESPONDENT S LIABILITY FOR CLAIMANT S INJURIES CHAPTER III CLARIFICATION AS TO AWARD REQUESTED BY CLAIMANT Part Two SUBMISSIONS AND TASK OF THE COURT

COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF LANCE PAUL LARSEN INTRODUCTION A. THE ISSUES BEFORE THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL 1. This case comes before the Court, in accordance with Article I of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, pursuant to an agreement between the Claimant, Mr. Lance Paul Larsen, and the Respondent, the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, requesting the Arbitral Tribunal to determine, on the basis of international law, whether (1) the rights of the Claimant under international law as a Hawaiian subject are being violated, and if so, (2) does Claimant have any redress against the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom? B. SUMMARY OF CLAIMANT S ARGUMENT 2. In his Memorial, Mr. Larsen summarized his position with respect to the issues before the Tribunal as the following: In sum, because of the prolonged occupation of the Hawaiian Islands, and the resulting denial of his nationality as a Hawaiian subject and imposition of American laws over his person, Mr. Larsen s rights have been violated under international law. Mr. Larsen s government, the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, has a duty under both domestic and international law to protect the rights of Mr. Larsen as well as all Hawaiian subjects. While Mr. Larsen has requested assistance from the acting Council of Regency, the occupation and corresponding violation of his rights continues today. It is Claimant s position that he does have redress against his government for failing to fulfill its obligations towards him. 1 3. As the submissions proposed by the Claimant in his Memorial, Mr. Larsen has requested the Arbitral Tribunal to adjudge and declare that

1. Mr. Larsen s rights as a Hawaiian subject are being violated under international law as a result of the prolonged occupation of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States of America. 2. Mr. Larsen does have redress against the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, as his government has obligations and duties to protect the rights of Hawaiian subjects even in times of war and occupation. 4. The factual and legal basis for Claimant s position is summarized in Claimant s Memorial, submitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration on 22 May 2000. C. SUMMARY OF RESPONDENT S ARGUMENT 5. In the Memorial submitted by the Respondent, the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom summarizes its position with respect to the issues before the Tribunal as the following: The Hawaiian Kingdom Government is not liable to the Claimant because it has not violated its public trust in accordance with Hawaiian Kingdom law and the law of nations. Rather, it is the United States who has committed international violations against the Hawaiian Kingdom, and thereby violating the rights of its subjects, in particular, the Claimant. 2 6. As the submissions proposed by the Respondent in its Memorial, The Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom requests the Arbitral Tribunal to adjudge and declare that 1. The Claimant s rights, as a Hawaiian subject, are being violated under international law, 2. The Claimant does not have a rights to redress against the Hawaiian Kingdom Government for these violations; and 3. The Party responsible for the violations of the Claimant s rights, as a Hawaiian subject, is the United States Government.

D. PROCEDURAL STATEMENT 7. Arbitration in the current case was formally initiated on 8 November 1999, at which point Claimant, Mr. Larsen, served upon Respondent, the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, a Notice of Arbitration to Initiate Recourse to Arbitral Proceedings. 3 8. The parties exchanged Memorials in Honolulu, on 25 May 2000. Copies of the Memorials were also submitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration for forwarding to the judges at that time. 9. The present Counter-Memorial is now submitted pursuant to the Joint Letter from the Parties to the Permanent Court of Arbitration notifying the Court of a 10 day extension to file the Counter-Memorials dated 12 June 2000, fixing 23 June 2000 as the date for the submission of the party s second round of written pleadings. Part One CLAIMANT S RESPONSE TO THE MEMORIAL OF THE HAWAIIAN KINGDOM CHAPTER I ISSUES AGREED UPON BY THE PARTIES 10. Both parties have acknowledged that the rights of the Claimant are being violated under international law. 4 11. Both parties have also acknowledged that the primary cause of these injuries is the prolonged occupation of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States of America. 5 12. Both parties have also acknowledged that the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom does have an obligation to protect the rights of the Claimant, Mr. Larsen, as a Hawaiian subject. 6 Specifically the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom acknowledged that The Hawaiian Kingdom Government was established by its sovereign to acknowledge and protect the rights of its citizenry. This protection covers the acts of States at war within the territory of the Kingdom.

CHAPTER II ISSUE IN DISPUTE: RESPONDENT S LIABILITY FOR CLAIMANT S INJURIES 13. The primary issue in contention between the parties is that of the liability of the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom towards the Claimant with respect to his injuries. 14. As summarized in Claimant s Memorial, 7 It is Claimant s position that the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom has a duty to protect Claimant s rights as a Hawaiian subject, even in times of war and occupation. 15. It is Claimant s position that although the United States of America is primarily liable to the Claimant for his injuries, the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom can also be held liable for these injuries, to the extent that the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom has not fulfilled its duty to protect Claimant s rights as a Hawaiian subject by preventing the United States of America from imposing its laws (as a part of occupation) within the territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom. 8 16. Claimant acknowledges the many steps taken by the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom to end the unlawful occupation of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States of America. Unfortunately, none of these steps have successfully protected the rights of Claimant as a Hawaiian subject from the continual denial of his nationality and imposition of American laws over his person. 17. Because the occupation of the Hawaiian Islands still continues, Claimant s rights continue to be violated. Until Claimant s rights are fully protected, his Government has not fulfilled its obligation towards him as a Hawaiian subject. Claimant now seeks redress against his Government because this obligation has not been fulfilled. Claimant seeks to hold his Government liable only to the extent requested in the award requested by Claimant in his Memorial.

CHAPTER III CLARIFICATION AS TO AWARD REQUESTED BY CLAIMANT 18. Claimant is NOT requesting monetary compensation from the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom for his injuries in the award requested from the Arbitral Tribunal. Claimant reserves his right at some future date to make a claim against the United States of America for monetary damages. 9 19. Instead, Claimant seeks to force the hand of his government to intervene or otherwise act to successfully end the unlawful occupation of the Hawaiian Islands, and thus to end the denial of his nationality and to end the imposition of American laws over his person. 20. Claimant has not requested an award for specific performance from this Arbitral Tribunal. Claimant has requested clarification as to whether he can hold his own Government liable for the continual occupation of his country. 21. If the Arbitral Tribunal issues an award that the Claimant is entitled to redress against the Hawaiian Kingdom, Claimant will at that point consider his options for seeking specific performance or some other remedy from Respondent. In his Memorial, Claimant did request clarification of what types of redress are available to him given such a ruling. It is Claimant s hopes that the Arbitral Tribunal can recommend action to be taken by the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom that will effectively protect Claimant s rights. Part Two SUBMISSIONS AND TASK OF THE COURT In view of the facts and arguments set forth in Claimant s Memorial, together with the clarification of those arguments set forth in this Counter-Memorial, Mr. Larsen requests the Arbitral Tribunal to adjudge and declare that 1. Mr. Larsen s rights as a Hawaiian subject are being violated under international law as a result of the prolonged occupation of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States of America.

2. Mr. Larsen does have redress against the Respondent Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, as his government has obligations and duties to protect the rights of Hawaiian subjects even in times of war and occupation. In the event of affirmation of these submissions, Mr. Larsen further requests from the Arbitral Tribunal any clarification on what types of redress are available to him, specifically whether there is any way to force the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom to take specific steps that will protect Claimant s rights. Respectfully submitted, this 23 day of June, 2000. Ninia Stacia Parks Attorney for Claimant Lance Paul Larsen 1 See paragraph 96, Memorial of Lance Paul Larsen. 2 See paragraph 320, Memorial of the Hawaiian Kingdom. 3 See Annex 7 of Claimant s Memorial. 4 See Submissions for both parties in their Memorials, or paragraphs 3.1 and 6.1 supra. 5 Id. 6 See Claimant s Memorial at paragraph 84; and Respondent s Memorial at paragraph 335. 7 See Claimant s Memorial, Part II, Chapter II, or paragraphs 84-96. 8 See paragraph 12, supra. 9 See Annex 1: Affidavit of Lance Paul Larsen, dated 21 May 2000.