top of page

Guidelines and Rules

The International Justice Olympiad consists of two rounds: regional and international. Regional finalists advance to the international round.

Regional Round (Case Study Evaluation) 

Regions are broken up into the following: 

​

  1. East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Oceania

  2. Europe, Russia, and Central Asia

  3. Middle East, North Africa, Central and South Africa

  4. South America, Central America, Mexico, and the islands of the Caribbean

  5. North America

On the launch date topics for the case studies are announced. Of the three types of cases mentioned (e.g., human rights violations, intellectual property theft, corruption charges) participants choose one and select a case, see Resources for case databases.

 

Once the case study fitting to the topic is selected, submissions must follow the format below to be evaluated. 

Regional Round Guidelines

 

  • Must select a case study from one of three categories released on launch day.
     

  • Evaluations must be no more than 1000 words.
     

  • Submissions must be in PDF format.
     

  • Submissions must be within 7 days of the launch date.
     

  • An MLA-style bibliography must be included.

Evaluations are judged on:
 

  1. Legal Understanding
    Accurately discern the legal tactics used in the case in regards to the relevant laws.
     

  2. Clarity
    Articulate the case in such a way that a layman could understand. 
     

  3. Structure
    Incorporate the elements of the case as they were presented eventually leading to the verdict.
     

  4. Ethical Reasoning
    Show awareness of justice as both a legal and moral concept when explaining why the outcome of the case was just or not.

    Finalists from the regional round will advance to the international round. 

International Round (Debate)

The international round is a debate. Seven days before the debate, a briefing is sent with three prompts that students are expected to prepare for. The briefing also includes the regional finalist’s assigned client and positions to advocate for. The debate will follow the format outlined below.


Format: Modified Parliamentary Style (individual)


Positions: Students represent a person, organization, nation, or legal institution (e.g., ICC, UNHRC, Constitutional Court).


Possible Topics:
 

The debate topics range from human rights concerns in conflict zones to artificial intelligence and legal responsibility of the nations to govern it. ​​


Structure:

​

  • Opening Statement (3 minutes) – Participants present their argument.​

​​

  • Opponent Rebuttal (4 minutes) – Opposing participant respond and critique the opposition.

​​

  • Cross-Examination (4 minutes total) – Moderated Q&A between participants.

​​

  • Closing Statement (2 minutes) – Final arguments both participants.


​Each debate is approximately 15–20 minutes, including transitions and brief moderator remarks.

Rules & Conduct

​

As participants of the international round, students are required to maintain respect and civility at all times. Personal attacks, disrespectful language, or interruptions will not be tolerated. 
 

For the Olympiad itself, participants are expected to to uphold factual integrity in regards to all the points they make. All evidence used must be truthful, verifiable, and clearly presented. Fabrication of data will lead to immediate disqualification. Beyond that, strict adherence to time limits will be enforced and a timekeeper will signal 1-minute and final 10-second warnings.

Judging Criteria

​

  • Clarity of Argument (25%)
    Arguments must be presented clearly, concisely, and professionally. Avoid unnecessary legal vernacular. 
     

  • Depth of Insight & Analysis (25%)
    Positions must be defended with legal precedent, morality, and evidence.
     

  • Evidence & Research Quality (25%)
    Display knowledge of the case subject. Prove your scholarly approach to the case. 
     

  • Rhetorical Persuasiveness (25%)
    Avoiding logical fallacies, and arguments based on emotions, hearsay, and faulty understandings.

Each finalist will be evaluated by our panel of scholars, professors, and social science professionals.

​​

There will be first, second, and third place finalists.

Anti-Plagiarism Policy

 

Zero Tolerance for Cheating

​

All evaluation and debate research must reflect the student’s own work. Any instance of plagiarism, AI-generated content without disclosure, or unauthorized collaboration will result in disqualification. Submissions will be reviewed with advanced plagiarism and authorship detection tools.

bottom of page