Monday, May 22, 2017

Sexual Assault at the American Law Institute (ALI)--The ALI and its Model Penal Code at the Center of the Controversies on the Sexualization of Criminal Law and the Criminalization of Sexual Rules

For the last several years, the American Law Institute has been embroiled in a quite lively controversy over the specific language of proposed structures of the criminal law of sex and sexual conduct.  This controversy reflects not merely the technical issues of drafting a fair set of statutory provisions that reflect a consensus of underlying principles of sexual conduct.  Rather, the controversy masks the real, and substantially unresolved societal framework for understanding what is sexual and what is not, and more importantly, for determining the extent of the legitimate authority of the state to extend its criminal law to conduct deemed both sexual and, by its nature, also criminal. What makes the conflict especially noteworthy is the way it marks a great shift of emphasis from the middle of the last century.,  In the 1950s, the ALI also faced great conflict in its approach to the Model Penal Code.  But the conflict revolved around decriminalization (e.g., here).  Today, the reverse appears to be true--conflicts revolve around two trends that are conflated in current discourse.  The first is the broadening of concepts of sexualization touching on the character of of conduct (see, e.g., here, here, here, and here).  The second is the criminalization of conduct now sexualized (e.g., here, here, and here).

I explained the context of the current controversy last year (here):
In 2012, the American Law Institute (in which I am a member), agreed to launch a revision of its famous and quite influential Model Penal Code to focus specifically on rising issues of "sexual assault and related offenses." The project It was acknowledged at the time that the issue of the decriminalization of certain conduct around sexual activity "deals with some of the most controversial matters on the current public agenda." (Richard L. Revesz, Director ALI in Forward ALI Model Penal Code: Sexual Assault and Related Offenses (Tent. Draft No. 2 (April 15, 20916). The project has been overseen by its reporter, Stephen J. Schulhofer and its associate reporter, Erin E. Murphy, both of NYU Law School. But it has been highly controversial as I reported in 2014 (see, Sexual Assualt at the American Law Institute--Controversy Over the Criminalization of Sexual Contact in the Proposed Revision of the Model Penal Code).
 The controversy is well evidenced by the history of this project before the ALI. In 2013, a draft on procedural and evidentiary principles applicable to the sexual assault provisions (¶ 213 of the Model Penal Code) and on collateral consequences of conviction was presented to ALI for discussion but no vote. For the 2014 ALI meeting, a tentative draft containing substantive material for discussion and an evidentiary section (proposed revision ¶ 213.7) for approval was submitted but no vote was taken. Again, for the 2015 meeting a draft on substantive and evidentiary material was presented for discussion but no vote. For its 2016 meeting, the ALI is asked to consider for approval two key provisions: ¶ 213.0(3) (definition of consent) and ¶ 213.2 (sexual penetration without consent).
The issue produced substantial controversy and opposition at the ALI's 2016 meeting (here, and here). Now a revised version is back, and the controversy remains lively.  This post includes the text of the Memorandum circulated to ALI members in opposition to the revised  provisions introduced at the 2017 ALI Meeting. Additional background materials may be found here and here.

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Podcast Interview Maastricht LawTalk on U.S. Law, "the Anglo-American legal order really that different?"

https://maastricht.lawtalk.eu/2017/05/18/5-united-states-law/#

During a visit to Maastricht University faculty of Law this week I was invited to spend some time to speak about U.S. law, its peculiarities and operation in the United States.  The interview has conducted as part of the Maastricht LawTalk series.  Maastricht LawTalk is an independent student run enterprise that describes itself this way:
Legal topics are not always easy to understand, even though they should be. Yet everyone engages in legal activities, be it in a criminal sense, in contractual agreements, or performing a duty. Knowing how to behave and what to do is indeed very useful.

Maastricht Law Talk offers talks about comparative law in the context of the European Union since October 2016. What is law and why do we – as a State – harm others with sentencing? The title honours the importance of the Treaty of Maastricht for the European Union.
It was a rare privilege to speak to European students about the basic nature of U.S. law and its legal system.  It was refreshing to find interest in the fundamental ordering of our system of law and government, and then to speak to the way in which that core theory informs the day to day operation of a law system "on the ground." My thanks to Benedikt Schmitz for putting this together and for his excellent questions. 

The podcast interview may be accessed here.

The narrative introduction follows.  Much of the discussion is drawn from ideas I have further elaborated in an forthcoming book,  More information about the topics discussed here may be accessed here

Conference: Accountability and International Business Operations: Providing Justice for Corporate Violations of Human Rights, Labor and Environmental Standards



(Pix © Larry Catá Backer 2017)



Sponsored by the Utrecht Center for Accountability and and Liability Law (UCALL), the upcoming conference, Accountability and International Business Operations: Providing Justice for Corporate Violations of Human Rights, Labor and Environmental Standards, as its name suggests, brings together a great group of individuals to consider one of the most dynamic areas of law and policy today--the normative and methodological issues, in economics, politics and law, that touch on the ramifications of business responsibility for human rights, labor and environmental standards in their operations. I am pleased to pass along more information about this upcoming conference, including a conference concept statement and more detailed program.

Conference Fees: Regular: 150 euro*; PhD Candidate: 75 euro; Student: 35 euro. * Under exceptional circumstances, we can grant a partial waiver for the conference fee to NGO’s registrations. In order to apply for this waiver, a motivated request should be send to ucallconference@uu.nl

Organization: The conference is organized by a team of researchers from the Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law:
Prof. Ivo Giesen (private law)
Dr. Liesbeth Enneking (private law)
Prof. François Kristen (criminal law)
Anne-Jetske Schaap, LLM (criminal law)
Prof. Cedric Ryngaert (international law)
Lucas Roorda, LLM (international law)

The Conference Concept Note and full Program follows:

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Interview with Mehr News (Iran): On the Strategic Importance and Ramifications of China's One Belt One Road Initiative

(Old Silk Road; Source here)


I was recently interviewed by Payman Yazdani for Mehr News Agency (Iran). We discussed the strategic importance and ramifications of China's One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative, with an emphasis on its significance for Turkey and Iran.


The text of the interview, موفقیت چین در احیای جاده ابریشم چشمگیر است/نقش ایران و ترکیه
("China's dramatic success in reviving the Silk Road dramatic / the role of Iran and Turkey") (with English translation) follows below.




Friday, May 12, 2017

Text of My Remarks, "Transnational Legal Orders and Global Regulatory Networks": to be delivered as part of the 2017 Global Law Week and the International Francqui Symposium on Global and Transnational Law Today


I have recently posted (here) about the third edition of the Brussels Global Law Week to be held from 15 to 19 of May 2017 and hosted by the Perelman Centre for Legal Philosophy (Université libre de Bruxelles Faculty of Law)

Posted below is the text of my remarks, Transnational Legal Orders and Global Regulatory Networks, to be delivered as part of the 2017 Global Law Week and the International Francqui Symposium on Global and Transnational Law Today.

Just Published: "Shaping a Global Law for Business Enterprises: Framing Principles and the Promise of a Comprehensive Treaty on Business and Human Rights"





I am happy to announce the publication of an article, "Shaping a Global Law for Business Enterprises: Framing Principles and the Promise of a Comprehensive Treaty on Business and Human Rights," that appears in the North Carolina Journal of International Law 42(2): 417-504 (2016).

The introduction follows; comments and engagement always welcome. This is the fourth in a series of recently published work that explores the legal ecology of globalization, the first within the private sector regulatory systems, the second in Marxist Leninist systems, the third within emerging constituting structures of transnational ordering beyond the state, and this fourth considering the approaches to embedding international norm systems within the great legalization projects of international law. 


Thursday, May 11, 2017

Announcing Conference: Brussels Global Law Week



From 15 to 19 of May 2017, the Perelman Centre will run the third edition of the Brussels Global Law Week. The conference concept note states
Reuniting theory and practice, the Brussels Global Law Week is an annual forum open to academics, researchers, students, NGOs, legal practitioners, regulators and decision-makers to discuss issues of law & globalization. Each year, special attention will be drawn to both research in global and transnational legal theory and practical issues in specific sectors. The short 2017 programme is attached hereby.
My thanks to the excellent job of the organizing committee: 
Prof. Benoît Frydman, Université libre de Bruxelles
Prof. Gregory Lewkowicz, Université libre de Bruxelles
Prof. Hugues Pirotte, Université libre de Bruxelles
Prof. David Restrepo Amariles, HEC Paris & Université libre de Bruxelles
Prof. Arnaud Van Waeyenberge, HEC Paris & Université libre de Bruxelles
Tilen Cuk, Université libre de Bruxelles
Joséphine Woronoff, Université libre de Bruxelles

For those interested in attending Registration is mandatory to attend the Brussels Global Law Week. Places are limited. Please register on EventBrite here. Attendance is free of charge for speakers and for faculty, staff & students of the Université libre de Bruxelles and KULeuven.  Registration fee is € 250 for the whole week. The daily rate is € 75. Please contact philodroit(at)ulb.ac.be. The fee is not refundable. Students and foreign participants may apply for a reduced fee by email. The registration fee includes admission to the Brussels Global Law Week, admission to the cocktail, lunches, coffee, tea and water during the breaks. Please see the brochure attached for further practical information concerning your stay, accommodation and transport.

Most of the interventions will take place at Solbosch Campus ULB, av. Franklin Roosevelt 50, 1050 Bruxelles.

The 2017 Programme follows

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

New Draft Paper Posted: "Sovereign Wealth Funds, Capacity Building, Development, and Governance"

(Pix © Larry Catá Backer 2017)




I am pleased to let those interested know that I have posted a draft of my essay, "Sovereign Wealth Funds, Capacity Building, Development, and Governance."

The paper considers the way that SWFs may be transformed by and are transforming the framework of global finance and production relationships. SWFs have already started moving well beyond their idealized form, established within the parameters of the Santiago Principles. SWFs now advance the political and economic projects of states, they serve to strengthen governance, they are the focal point for the normalization of global human rights in economic activities projects, and they also serve to advance the development goals of states. The old issues of the commercial character of these mechanisms, and of their effects of the financial markets and ownership structures of rich home states remains important, but may no longer be the central element pushing the development of SWFs. Law and regulatory structures lag far behind the realities that are taking shape on the ground. The public-private divide, the constraining structures of national principles of taxation and sovereign immunity are now ripe for contestation and change. But on what basis?

The final version is expected to be published with the Wake Forest Law Review whose staff I look forward to working with. In the meantime, comments, engagement and the like deeply appreciated. The abstract and introduction follow.  


No.200 许章润 |先天不足,后天失调 (No. 200 Xu Zhang Run "congenitally deficient, acquired disorders")



This is another in the series of essays that were presented at the “来华外国人与近代中国法” 国际学术研讨会 "Foreigners and Modern Chinese Law" International Symposium Conference and then continued thereafter in the same spirit.


No.200 许章润 |先天不足,后天失调 (No. 200 Xu Zhang Run congenitally deficient, acquired disorders). This contribution is particularly interesting for its reflections by Xu Zhang Run.  Beautifully written.

The essay was posted to 叁會學坊, the San Hui Fang Workshops microblog and it follows below 中国语文 only.

Tuesday, May 09, 2017

The Battle Between Regulatory and Managerial Approaches Within the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund--The Case of Corruption



The Norwegian Pension Fund Global made public a set of recommendations on May 5.  Most are unremarkable in and of themselves.  What draws attention is what appears to be a difference in appears between the Ethics Council, on the one hand, and Norges Bank, on the other., on the more sensitive issue of corruption (with respect to which I have written critically here, here, and here
On 5 May 2017, the Council on Ethics issued four recommendations relating to gross corruption and one recommendation relating to serious environmental damage.
Norges Bank decided to place under observation two companies that the Council had recommended be excluded due to their involvement in cases of corruption. Furthermore, Norges Bank decided to exercise shareholder rights with respect to two companies involved in corruption cases, where the Council had recommended observation. Norges Bank decided to abide by the Council’s recommendation to exclude a company on the grounds of its involvement in serious environmental damage. (HERE)
This post considers some consequences of that rift and provides links to the decisions. 

Monday, May 08, 2017

27th Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy: Two CLE Programs; "Foreign Investment in Cuba: Law, Policy, and Practicalities" and "Coordinating U.S. and Cuban Legal Principles to Resolve Property and Damage Claims"



The 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy will take place in Miami, Florida 27-29 July 2017. The three-day conference, around the theme Cuba: Navigating a Turbulent World, will focus on evaluating the state of the Cuban economy taking into consideration the impending changes in Cuba’s relations with the United States. I will post the final program when it is ready. Those of you in Miami at the end of July might consider participating.

For the first time this year
ASCE’s 2017 Annual Conference includes two CLE-qualifying law sessions organized by Crowell & Moring LLP. Licensed attorneys who register for our conference can receive 1.5 Florida Bar CLE credits for each of the sessions described below, for a total of 3 CLE credit hours. If you need CLE from another jurisdiction, you will receive a Uniform Certificate of Attendance for submission to other states. These sessions will cover the following:


Pedro A. Freyre, Partner; Chair, International Practice, Akerman LLP; and Rolando Anillo, Corporate Counsel, Florida Crystals Corp., and President, Cuban Claims Owners Association will offer a session entitled, "Coordinating U.S. and Cuban Legal Principles to Resolve Property and Damage Claims." I will be offering a session "Foreign Investment in Cuba: Law, Policy, and Practicalities."

More information follows:


Sunday, May 07, 2017

Call for Participation: The Geneva Challenge 2017, The Advancing Development Goals, International Contest for Graduate Students: The Challenges of Employment




This from Prof. Martina Viarengo, who is chairing the academic steering committee, for the 2017 edition of The Geneva Challenge - Advancing Development Goals International Contest for graduate students. This year students are invited to develop analysis-based proposals on "The Challenges of Employment".
The 2017 edition of the Geneva Challenge is a project funded by Swiss Ambassador Jenö Staehelin and is supported by Kofi Annan, the high-patron of the contest. The Geneva Challenge aims to motivate master students to develop ideas on advancing human development within the scope of a relevant topic.

Access to employment is regarded as a tool to improve living standards and eradicate poverty and today the challenges have become a critical concern for both developing and developed countries. As the key to this challenge is an interdisciplinary solution, crossing traditional boundaries between academic disciplines, we are inviting graduate students from all academic programmes to provide helpful strategic recommendations.

Teams of 3-5 master students must submit an 8,000 word proposal which:
--identify a challenge stemming from employment;
--construct an interdisciplinary analysis on how it affects different aspects of development in a specific (but transposable) context;
--propose innovation at the policy, practice, process or technology levels turning the challenge into development opportunity.

The Geneva Challenge 2017 will distribute 17’500 CHF in monetary prizes and the finalists will be invited to publicly present their work in Geneva before a panel of high-level experts. Networking and publication opportunities are also envisioned as part of the prize package.

Registrations close on 25th May 2017.
Submission due by 31st July 2017.
More information is available on: www.thegenevachallenge.org
 More information follows:

Saturday, May 06, 2017

The Congressional-Executive Commission on China VIDEO: Key Moments from CECC hearing “Will the Hong Kong Model Survive?




The Congressional-Executive Commission on China was created by the U.S. Congress in 2000 "with the legislative mandate to monitor human rights and the development of the rule of law in China, and to submit an annual report to the President and the Congress. The Commission consists of nine Senators, nine Members of the House of Representatives, and five senior Administration officials appointed by the President." (CECC About). The CECC FAQs provide useful information about the CECC. See CECC Frequently Asked Questions. They have developed positions on a number of issues: Access to Justice; Civil Society;Commercial Rule of Law; Criminal Justice; Developments in Hong Kong and Macau ; The Environment ; Ethnic Minority Rights;Freedom of Expression; Freedom of Religion ; Freedom of Residence and Movement ; Human Trafficking ; Institutions of Democratic Governance ; North Korean Refugees in China; Population Planning ; Public Health ; Status of Women ; Tibet ; Worker Rights ; and Xinjiang.

CECC tends to serve as an excellent barometer of the thinking of political and academic elites in the United States about issues touching on China and the official American line developed in connection with those issues. As such it is an important source of information about the way official and academic sectors think about China. As one can imagine many of the positions of the CECC are critical of current Chinese policies and institutions (see, e.g., here, here, here here, here, here, here, here, and here).

This post includes video presentations of the recently concluded CECC hearings on Hong Kong--a space which seems to have drawn the especial attention of the CECC recently (and not without purpose).  Hong Kong appears increasingly to serve as the space within which China and the U.S. test their positions and implement their strategies.  On the U.S. side what is emerging is a new strategy that builds on that of the old Democratic Party and elite intellectual consensus, but with a different aim.   Hong Kong is particularly important now because of its strategically symbolic importance. It has been 20 years since the U.K. ceded the territory back to the Chinese.  For China, Hong Kong represents both an example of its ability to respect treaties and engage with residual political systems in its aggregate national territory.  It also serves as the site where the Chinese Dream--and its openness -- might be best evidenced.  For the United States, Hong Kong represents the necessary wedge for drawing China as an power that does not keep its word, that overplays its hand, and that cannot be trusted.  That is an extraordinarily useful objective--not in China, but as a means of disrupting China's plans for a seamless OBOR system. One might usefully consider the conference contributions in this light.  

The Conference concept note included in the press release and the links to the presentations follow.




Two Calls for Papers From Karin Buhmann (Copenhagen Business School) on Issues in Business and Human Rights

(Pix  © Larry Catá Backer 2017)


My friend Karin Buhmann, Professor, Dr.scient.adm. & PhD (law) and Professor with special responsibilities in Business & Human Rights, Department of Management, Society and Communication (MSC) Copenhagen Business School, has announced two quite interesting calls for papers. She writes:
One is for a special issue of the Nordic Journal on Human Rights (NJHR), on research methods in regard to Business & Human Rights. (Please note that it is not a precondition for submission that authors attend the paper-development workshop noted in the CfP. Unfortunately some internet sites that make mention of this CfP incorrectly state that attendance is a precondition for manuscript submission.) This call may be of particular interest to scholars (including young scholars) who have been doing research in which they have elaborated research methods and explained methodological issues in regard to BHR and its often interdisciplinary character. Published by Taylor&Francis, the NJHR is a well established and highly reputed international Human Rights journal.

The other is for a special issue of the Journal Competition & Change on the topic of Business conduct and Human Rights in Global Value Chains. A paper-development workshop for authors whose submissions have been shortlisted for revision and re-submission is being organised at Aarhus University (Denmark) back-to-back with a seminar on Global Value Chains, tentatively on 5 and 6 December 2017. Authors invited to take part will be informed in early November. Here too, attending the workshop is not a condition for submission.
 The announcements follow.


Thursday, May 04, 2017

No.191 王银宏 : 1356年《金玺诏书》与德意志国王选举制度 (No.191 Wang Yinhong: 1356 "Golden Bull [Jin Xi] edict" and the electoral system of the Holy Roman Empire)




This is another in the series of essays that were presented at the “来华外国人与近代中国法” 国际学术研讨会 "Foreigners and Modern Chinese Law" International Symposium Conference and then continued thereafter in the same spirit.

No.191 王银宏 : 1356年《金玺诏书》与德意志国王选举制度 (No.191 Wang Yinhong: 1356 "Golden Bull [Jin Xi] edict" and the electoral system of the Holy Roman Empire).

This contribution is particularly interesting for its focus on the constitutional structures (and longevity) of the Holy Roman Empire, with a focus on the Golden Bull of 1356. It is somewhat refreshing--either in China or the West--for scholars to turn to the wider universe of constitutional writings that flourished before the orthodoxy of Franco-American constitutionalism began to occupy a central place in theories of constitutions (with a sidelong glance at the possibilities of Marxist and indigenous constitutionalism). Of course there are echoes of the Golden Bull within mainstream post Revolutionary French constitutionalism. But seeing these more ancient forms with new eyes, unpolluted by the socialization of Western constitutionalism and its ideologies, might produce some interesting insight--for Westerners and for Chinese trying to better embed their own constitutional journeys within global discourse.

The essay was posted to 叁會學坊, the San Hui Fang Workshops microblog and it follows below 中国语文 only.


Video Recording Available: International Conference: New International Trade and Investment Rules Between Globalization and Anti-Globalization


I was delighted to have helped organize a conference at Penn State: New International Trade and Rules Between Globalization and Anti-Globalization. The Conference concept note and program may be accessed here. Other even related content may be accessed here, here, and here.
We have now been able to make available the video recording of the entire conference.All of the recording links to our events from April 21-24 can be found here under the “Archived Event Video” tab.  Links to each day of the conference may be accessed through the following links:

Friday April 21
Saturday Morning April 22
Saturday Afternoon April 22
Sunday April 23
Monday April 24

My thanks to the staff at Penn State Law for making this possible and for hosting the site. 

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

Piecemeal Globalization of Business and Human Rights Disclosure Systems One State at a Time: A Focus on Australia



Almost a decade ago in an article, From Moral Obligation to International Law: Disclosure Systems, Markets and the Regulation of Multinational Corporations,  I suggested a potential emerging trend in the way in which global civil society--and the states most likely influenced by their efforts--would be able to enhance the importance of human rights based business regulation through systems of disclosure and due diligence.  These would fuse the soft law business and human rights normative project of international organizations and civil society with national systems that remain tied to the conventional constraints of territory and the preservation of the now century old premises of corporate law. "The object of these mandates would not be to establish a definitive set of behaviors, but rather to establish a framework within which corporate stakeholders-consumers, investors, labor, and others - could adjust their relationships on the basis of the behavior disclosed."  But the effect of these mandates would be toward the hardening of international soft law norms within domestic legal orders.  That is a trend that global civil society, at least some important elements of that community, are now committed.And it is producing important innovations at the national level with global effects.


This post considers the way that recent efforts by global civil society to align Australia within this framework of governance--by hardening international normative standards through national due diligence and disclosure legal frameworks--are shaping emerging trends that seek to create global governance of business conduct related to human rights through linkages between public and private governance institutions through public regulation of private governance.


Tuesday, May 02, 2017

Know your Rights, An Information Guide to the Basics of New York State Legal System 了解您的权益,纽约州法律制度基础信息指南 A Coalition for Peace & Ethics Project








On behalf of the Coalition for Peace & Ethics I am happy to announce the roll out of our first technical assistance project: Know your Rights, An Information Guide to the Basics of New York State Legal System 了解您的权益,纽约州法律制度基础信息指南

The Know Your Rights New York project targets the Chinese immigrant community in New York, and especially those communities in the greater New York City area. The laboring oar for the Know Your Rights New York project was undertaken by Shan Gao, who developed the approach and did much of the design work for the information booklet. It is Mr. Gao's voice that one hears on the audio version of the Know Your Rights New York booklet.Eventually we hope to augment the offerings with video segments that may be useful for our audience. 

We hope this is the first of other similar projects that will target immigrant and other communities whose access to information tends to be more constrained. This is in keeping with our mission to bring information, knowledge and greater control over everyday lives to people who are otherwise more likely to sit at the margins of mainstream society and mainstream social discourse. Having the tools to manage one's life is an essential element to individual dignity and to be able to take advantage of those opportunities society makes available to all. Future projects include outreach to other immigrant groups as well as to other groups whose access to basic information may be more limited. 

The introduction and links to the booklet and audio follow. 

Monday, May 01, 2017

Submission of Foundation for Law and International Affairs (FLIA) and Coalition for Peace & Ethics (CPE) Responding to Call for inputs - Report of High Commissioner - "Civil society space in multilateral institutions"

(Pix  Larry Catá Backer 2017)
By  Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council  (A/HRC/RES/32/31 (20 July 2016) E F S A C R) the High Commissioner was requested to prepare a Report:
. . .  compiling information on the procedures and practices in respect of civil society involvement with regional and international organizations, including United Nations bodies, agencies, funds and programmes, and the contribution of civil society to their work and challenges and best practices, and in that regard to continue to engage with and seek input from those organizations and entities, as well as the views of States, national human rights institutions, civil society and other stakeholders, and to submit the compilation to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-eighth session (Resolution ¶ 18)
To that end, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights invited contributions from national human rights institutions, civil society and other stakeholders for the forthcoming report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 32/31 on civil society space. An earlier post included the High  Commissioner's "Call for Inputs" and a short discussion of the value of making contributions to that effort (see, Call for inputs - Report of High Commissioner - "Civil society space in multilateral institutions" - Deadline 1 May 2017 ).

This post sets out the Submission of the Foundation for Law and International Affairs (FLIA) and the Coalition for Peace & Ethics (CPE) Responding to Call for inputs - Report of High Commissioner - "Civil society space in multilateral institutions". The Submission was the work of a great team of individuals--Flora Sapio, Shaoming Zhu, Keren Wang and me