Skip to main content

Demystifying Alexander Nahum Sack and the doctrine of odious debt

Eric Tousaint’s study of the odious debt doctrine

by Eric Toussaint

Part 19 - Can we really talk of “Sack’s odious debt doctrine”?

If we consider that a “doctrine” designates the totality of the opinions expressed by legal experts as the result of their reflection on a given rule or situation; if elaborating a doctrine means “A legal framework, defining it, placing it within the context of the law, defining its limits, its practical application, the social effects and at the same time making a systematic, analytical, critical and comparative examination”, it is justified to consider that Sack has elaborated an odious debt doctrine.

To elaborate his doctrine he referred to an ample quantity of international treaties pertaining to arbitrations on questions of debt repayments concluded between the end of the 18th century and the 1920s; he analysed the way disputes over debt had been treated and the legal, administrative and judicial measures taken; he collected and classified the opinions of numerous authors (in fact, only Europeans and Americans) who had studied the question. He presented his vision of the nature of debts, the obligations of the debtors and the rights of the creditors, the relations between successor States, the way debts and the effects of regime changes were shared, and defined the criteria for odious debts.

The doctrine is open to criticism, has weaknesses, gives priority to creditors and does not consider human rights, but it does have a certain coherence. It must also be said that, although disparaged by influential detractors (the mainstream media, the World Bank and numerous governments), it inspires numerous movements who look to Sack’s work for solutions to debt problems. Sack’s two criteria for determining that a debt is odious and a nation may decide not to pay, are applicable and justified.

Henceforth, we must now go beyond Sack’s doctrine using that which is applicable and rejecting that which is unacceptable and adding elements related to the social and democratic advances that have been made in international law since the Second World War.

What must also be added straight to the odious debt doctrine is the liability of the creditors; they regularly violate the established treaties and other international instruments for the protection of rights. The IMF and the World Bank have continually and deliberately imposed policies on debtor counties that violate many fundamental human rights. The Troika that was established in 2010 to impose brutal austerity policies on Greece dictated laws that contravene several National and International conventions on rights. The creditors are more than just accomplices to illegal and sometimes frankly criminal acts committed by governments. They are in some cases the instigators of the acts.

The experience that has been accumulated since Sack made his studies indicates that several of Sack’s positions may now be updated. A fundamental point that must now be rejected is the continuity of a State’s liabilities, even in the case of a change in the regime. Of course Sack is in favour of recognising an exception – odious debt. But that is insufficient. Another point to reject is Sack’s support for the current international financial system. Finally, Sack considers that a sovereign State may not unilaterally repudiate debts it has identified as odious without a ruling by a competent international court (See above passage: “The new government must prove and an international tribunal recognise that the following is established:
a) that the purpose which the former government wanted to cover by the debt in question was odious and clearly against the interests of the population of the whole or part of the territory, and
b) that the creditors, at the moment of the issuance of the loan, were aware of its odious purpose.”) Since Sack made this proposal, no international court of the sort has been created. Numerous proposals have been made, but none have been brought to fruition. Experience shows that another way must be chosen: a sovereign State that discovers that it has an odious debt can and should repudiate it unilaterally. The first steps towards this goal would be to suspend payments and to conduct an audit with the participation of the citizens.

A new doctrine of illegitimate, illegal, odious and unsustainable debt needs to be elaborated. Movements such as the CADTM have taken on the task in collaboration with many other associations, and in bringing together a wide variety of competences. The following is a large extract of the position adopted by CADTM in 2008 and which still remains pertinent:

Several authors have further sought to develop the works of Sack and to adapt this doctrine to the present context. For example, the Centre for International Sustainable Development Law (CISDL) of McGill University in Canada, has proposed this general definition: “Odious debts are those that have been incurred against the interests of the population of a State, without its consent and with full awareness of the creditors.” Jeff King based his analysis on these three criteria (absence of consent, absence of benefit, awareness of creditors), and cumulative calculation, to propose a method to categorise these odious debts.

While King’s analysis is interesting in many respects, we argue that it is deficient, since it does not allow for the inclusion of all debts that should be qualified as odious. In fact, according to King, the mere establishment of a government by free elections is enough to disqualify its debts from being categorised as odious. However, history shows, through Hitler in Germany, Marcos in the Philippines or Fujimori in Peru, that “democratically” elected governments can be violent dictatorships and commit crimes against humanity.

It is thus necessary to analyse the democratic character of a debtor State beyond its appellation: any loan must be considered odious, if a regime, democratically elected or not, does not respect the fundamental principles of international law such as fundamental human rights, the sovereignty of States, or the absence of the use of force. The creditors, in the case of notorious dictators, cannot plead their innocence and demand to be repaid. In this case, the purpose of the loans is not fundamental for the categorisation of the debt. In fact, financially supporting a criminal regime, even for hospitals and schools, is tantamount to helping the regime’s consolidation and self-preservation. Firstly, some useful investments (roads, hospitals…) can later be used to odious ends, for example, to sustain war efforts. Secondly, the fungibility of funds makes it possible for a government that borrows to serve the population or the State – which, officially, is always the case – to generate other funds for less noble goals.

The nature of regimes aside, the purpose of funds should suffice to qualify debts as odious, that is, whenever these funds are used against the populations’ major interests or when they directly enrich the regime’s cohorts. In this case, the debts become personal debts, and not those of the State which is represented by its people and its representatives. Let’s recall one of the conditions of debt regulation, according to Sack: “the debts of State have to be incurred and the funds that are derived must be used for the needs and in the interests of the State.” Thus, multilateral debts incurred within the framework of structural adjustments fall into the category of odious debts, since the destructive character of these debts has been clearly shown, namely by UN agencies.

In fact, considering the development of international law since the first theorisation of odious debt in 1927, odious debts can be defined as those incurred by governments which violate the major principles of international law such as those included in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the two complementing covenants on civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights of 1966, as well the peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens). This affirmation is confirmed by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Laws of Treaties, whose article 53 allows for the cancellation of acts which conflict with jus cogens and which also accounts for the following norms: prohibition of wars of aggression, prohibition of torture, prohibition to commit crimes against humanity and the right of peoples to self-determination.

This spirit infuses the definition proposed by the Special Rapporteur Mohammed Bedjaoui in the report on the succession of State debts to the 1983 Vienna Convention: “From the point of view of the international community, odious debt is understood as any debt incurred for purposes that contradict contemporary international law, particularly the principles of international law incorporated in the UN Charter.

Thus, the debts incurred by the apartheid regime in South Africa are odious, since this regime violated the UN Charter, which defines the legal framework of international relations. In a resolution adopted in 1964, the UN had asked its specialised agencies, including the World Bank, to cease financial support of South Africa. In contempt of international law, the World Bank ignored this resolution and continued to lend to the Apartheid regime.

International law also stipulates that debts resulting from colonisation are not transferable to newly independent states, in conformity with Article 16 of the 1978 Vienna Convention that says “A newly independent State is not bound to maintain in force, or to become a party to, any treaty by reason only of the fact that at the date of the succession of States the treaty was in force in respect of the territory to which the succession of States relates”. Article 38 of the 1983 Vienna Convention on the succession of states in respect of States Property, Archives and Debts (not yet applicable) is quite explicit in this respect:

1. “When the successor State is a newly independent State, no State debt of the predecessor State shall pass to the newly independent State, unless an agreement between them provides otherwise in view of the link between the State debt of the predecessor State connected with its activity in the territory to which the succession of States relates and the property, rights and interests which pass to the newly independent State”.

2. “The agreement referred to in paragraph 1 shall not infringe the principle of the permanent sovereignty of every people over its wealth and natural resources, nor shall its implementation endanger the fundamental economic equilibrium of the newly independent State”.

It should be kept in mind that the World Bank is directly involved in some colonial debts since in the 1950s and 1960s it generously loaned money to colonial countries for them to maximise the profits they derived from colonial exploitation. It must also be noted that the debts granted by the World Bank to the Belgian, French and English authorities within their colonial policies were later transferred to the newly independent states without their consent.

Moreover it did not comply with a 1965 UN resolution demanding that it stop its support to Portugal as long as this country maintains its colonial policy.

We must also define as odious all debts incurred in order to pay back odious debts. The New Economic Foundation rightly considers that loans contracted in order to pay back odious loans are similar to a laundering operation. Auditing debts will determine which loans are legitimate.

While there are dissensions on the definition of odious debts, the legal debate takes nothing away from its relevance and cogency. On the contrary, such debate reflects just what is at stake for both the creditors and the debtors and is simply the transfer of conflicting interests onto a legal level. Several cases have shown that the notion of odious debt is a legally valid argument not to pay debts.

Source and references:


[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [20]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Trump's "brigades" are ready to start a civil war in case he loses November's election

globinfo freexchange
Signs show an extremely explosive situation now in the America of Donald Trump. 
Starting with the murder of George Floyd, we witness almost in daily basis some very disturbing incidents, which unveil a deeply divided society that was hiding for decades behind the "American dream" facade. As the facade now rapidly collapses, due to a major financial crisis and a pandemic, in less than fifteen years, the reality looks terrifying.
In a latest incident, Common Dreamsreported that members of a far right militia group were arrested Monday evening in Albuquerque after a standoff at a statue of a notoriously brutal conquistador in the New Mexico city turned violent with a demonstrator advocating for the removal of the monument shot and sent to the hospital.
As dusk fell, demonstrators began attempting to pull the monument down from its pedestal on the Albuquerque Museum grounds. At that point, members of the New Mexico Civil Guard militia group moved in, attack…

Evidence that Biden will start an AI-conducted war with Iran on behalf of the new Military-HighTech complex

globinfo freexchange

About two months ago, we mentioned Joe Biden's terrible response on whether he would lift sanctions on Iran due the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.
As we wrote back then, Biden didn't even bother to defend one of the very few positive achievements that the Obama administration - during which he served as vice-president - left behind: the Iran nuclear deal.

Instead, he dropped all the assets he had in his arsenal that would help him attack Trump from the Left. And he did it, just only to make sure that he would not disturb the deep state apparatus with his response because the question was meant to test Biden's loyalty on the deep state agenda.

Connecting the dots, we found something even more terrifying. New evidence shows that key people around Biden and his potential cabinet in case he wins November's election, are deeply connected with the Military-HighTech complex. And that they will not hesitate to make Iran a test field for the first AI war i…

Ο Κούλης επιβεβαιώνει πλήρως ότι θα εφαρμόσει νέο, σκληρό μνημόνιο!

globinfo freexchange
Όπως είχαμε αναφέρει ήδη από το 2016 και αμέσως μετά την εκλογή Μητσοτάκη στην ηγεσία της ΝΔ, το αποτέλεσμα των εσωτερικών εκλογών στη γαλάζια παράταξη έλυνε τα χέρια του άξονα Βρυξελλών-Βερολίνου. Οι γραφειοφασίστες των Βρυξελλών και το διευθυντήριο του Βερολίνου απέκτησαν μια πρώτης τάξεως εφεδρεία σε περίπτωση που τα πράγματα "στράβωναν" με την κυβέρνηση Τσίπρα.  
Έτσι, ο νέος [τότε] αρχηγός της ΝΔ, Κυριάκος Μητσοτάκης, αποτελεί την καλύτερη λύση προκειμένου να εφαρμόσει πιστά τις πιο σκληρές νεοφιλελεύθερες πολιτικές προκειμένου να ολοκληρωθεί το πείραμα με κάθε λεπτομέρεια.
Ήρθε η ώρα να μας επαληθεύσει πλήρως ο ίδιος ο Μητσοτάκης. Όπως αναφέρει ρεπορτάζ του tvxs.gr:
Μνημόνια με τη μορφή κυβερνητικής πολιτικής είναι το οικονομικό σχέδιο του Κυριάκου Μητσοτάκη, όπως προκύπτει από τη συνέντευξή του στους Financial Times, με αφορμή τη σύνοδο κορυφής της ΕΕ στις 17-18 Ιουλίου. Ο πρωθυπουργός μάλιστα θεωρεί ότι η πανδημία μπορεί να αποτελέσει…

Firm linked to HHS’ Robert Kadlec poised to become exclusive manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines

A pharmaceutical firm with a dark history and questionable ties to serving ASPR Robert Kadlec is poised to become the exclusive manufacturer of the COVID-19 vaccines now being funded through Trump’s Operation Warp Speed.
by Raul Diego 
Part 1
Trump’s much-ballyhooed “Operation Warp Speed” unveiled in May of this year to produce and deploy a COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S. is shaping up to be yet another scheme to funnel millions of dollars into a singularly corrupt pharmaceutical entity with deep ties to Robert Kadlec, the serving Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), who is in charge of the Strategic National Stockpile and is the architect of the legislative edifice which currently governs the nation’s public-private partnership (PPP) approach to health emergencies.
The task force’s latest and largest grant was awarded to Maryland-based Novavax, Inc. to cover late-stage testing and manufacturing of their COVID-19 vaccine candidate. Only the sixth company to receive fed…

Meet the far-right oligarchs working to topple Mexico’s progressive President AMLO

A Trump-like Mexican oligarch, Gilberto Lozano, is leading a coalition of corporate leaders and far-right fanatics called FRENA to try to overthrow President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
by José Guadalupe Argüello III and Ben Norton
Part 5 - FRENA’s June 13/14 car protest and future plans
In its second anti-AMLO protest, FRENA claimed to have 140 vehicle caravans across Mexico and the United States on the weekend of June 13 and 14.
Protests were reported in all major Mexican urban centers, along with major cities in Texas, California, Michigan, Illinois, and Washington, as well as Toronto, Canada.
As in the demonstrations in May, these featured many luxury cars and trucks, bearing signs with messages like “Leave now AMLO, we don’t want communism”.
Mexican Twitter was quick to point out the unintentional comedy of the protests, such as a viral photo of a banner on the back of an SUV that read, “No to Communism, No to Socialism, No to Mozimism, Mexico is Catholic”. Mozimismo is not a real…

What does community control of police look like?

The Grayzone
Red Lines host Anya Parampil speaks with Chicago-based activist and author Frank Chapman about his life story as well as his vision for community control over the police. 
Frank has been in the struggle for more than 50 years— beginning with his time as a young man serving a life sentence in Missouri state prison. While incarcerated, Chapman became a self-taught radical, eventually leading a successful fight to desegregate Missouri state prisons and cchieve his own freedom. Chapman shares his remarkable story his memoir, "The Damned Don't Cry, Pages From the Life of a Black Prisoner & Organizer".

Σκάνδαλο με υπογραφή Μητσοτάκη

Επιβεβαιώνονται οι υποψίες ότι τεράστια ποσά της καμπάνιας «Μένουμε Σπίτι» μοιράστηκαν στους «ημετέρους» και τους «υποστηρικτές» της κυβέρνησης.
Δημήτρης Ψαρράς
Μετά την πίεση των κομμάτων της αντιπολίτευσης και την επιμονή ελάχιστων μέσων ενημέρωσης, η κυβέρνηση υποχρεώθηκε να δώσει χθες στη δημοσιότητα τον πίνακα με τους αποδέκτες και τα ποσά που μοιράστηκαν στον καθένα από το κονδύλι των 20 εκατ. ευρώ της καμπάνιας «Μένουμε Σπίτι».
Η «Εφ.Συν.» από την πρώτη στιγμή στηλίτευσε τη σκανδαλώδη διαδικασία που ακολουθήθηκε, ενώ πριν από δυο βδομάδες (23.6.) προχώρησε και σε αίτηση προς τους δυο αρμόδιους υφυπουργούς, Πέτσα και Σκυλακάκη, σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 5 του Κώδικα Διοικητικής Δικονομίας, η οποία δεν μπορούσε να μείνει αναπάντητη.
Τελικά δίκιο είχε και έκρυβε τη λίστα η κυβέρνηση. Η δημοσιοποίηση των ποσών στον πίνακα των 1.232 μέσων ενημέρωσης που ανακοινώθηκε χθες αφήνει τον αναγνώστη άφωνο. Παρά το γεγονός ότι μεσολάβησε ένα μεγάλο διάστημα, κατά το οποίο είναι βέβαιο ότι έγιναν κά…

Trump used looted Venezuelan public money to build border wall with Mexico

An estimated $24 billion of Venezuelan public money has been looted, and the Trump administration has used at least $601 million of it to construct a militarized wall on the US-Mexico border.
by Ben Norton
Part 2 - Right-wing opposition upset Trump didn’t give Guaidó gang all stolen Venezuelan money
The Trump corruption scandal has been almost entirely ignored by mainstream corporate media outlets. Univision buried its own scoop deep in a report that advanced the talking points of Venezuela’s US-backed right-wing opposition and referred to the elected government of President Nicolás Maduro as a “widely repudiated regime.
Univision, the largest corporate media network in the United States that focuses on Latino issues, is owned by billionaire-controlled private equity firms, one of the most prominent of whom is the Israeli-American oligarch Haim Saban.
Based in Miami, the de facto capital of the Latin American right, this massive media conglomerate acts as a mouthpiece for conservative f…

The Washington Post and its Cold War drums

by Melvin Goodman
The Washington Post has taken its Cold War campaign against China, Russia, and Iran to a new level.  In the Sunday edition of its Outlook section, the Post gave front-page coverage to long articles by former ambassador Michael McFaul and former New York Times’ writer Tim Weiner to trumpet Russia’s “constant aggression” and its “brutal Cold War rules.”  There was no hint whatsoever of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s efforts to improve Russian-American relations over the past two decades, and no suggestion that the actions of the United States over the past 25 years have significantly contributed to the poor state of relations between Moscow and Washington.
The companion pieces have supportive titles, which suggests an editorial decision to express an authoritative point of view.  McFaul’s article is titled “Trump always finds a way to let Putin win….”, and Weiner’s screed follows with “….even when Russia plays by brutal Cold War rules.”  Their joint thesis is a sim…

Here we go again: neoliberal machine prepares ground to blame the Greens for a potential Biden defeat in November

globinfo freexchange

It seems that the neoliberal machine creates the suitable climate in order to put the blame on the usual scapegoats in case Joe Biden loses November's election.

Politico's recent article leaves little doubt. Check out the title:
Jill Stein cost Hillary dearly in 2016. Democrats are still writing off her successor.

And the first paragraphs confirm the case:

                         Jill Stein still haunts Hillary Clinton’s campaign team. “Oh woof. I can’t bear to talk about that,” said former communications director Jennifer Palmieri. For good reason: Had voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin cast their ballots for Clinton rather than the Green Party’s Stein, Clinton would be president. 

                         Now, with the Green Party set to elevate its presumptive nominee — Howie Hawkins, a longtime labor activist keen on attracting disillusioned Bernie Sanders voters and calling for a “#DemExit” — many Democrats are unfazed. Not to worry, they sa…