ABA Committees To Hold Joint Meeting on Developments in International Debarment – February 13, 2020 – Call in

Jessica Tillipman, GWU Law School – Co-chair, ABA SIL Anti-Corruption Committee

On February 13, 2020, at 12:00 noon ET, the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of International Law (SIL) Anti-Corruption Committee will join with the ABA Public Contract Law Section (PCLS) Suspension and Debarment Committee, for an informal lunchtime session on developments in international debarment. The session will be moderated by Assistant Dean Jessica Tillipman, George Washington University Law School, Washington DC.

Christopher Yukins, George Washington University Law School (who co-teaches courses on anti-corruption with Dean Tillipman), will discuss emerging international models for debarment, and the impact that new electronic marketplaces may have on debarment globally.  With regard to the U.S. experience, he has drafted a book chapter with John Pachter and Jessica Tillipman, for a forthcoming book on compliance by Cambridge University Press.  Professor Yukins has also co-written a piece with Professor Michal Kania (U. Silesia – Katowice), comparing debarment in the United States and the European Union.

Pascal Friton, BLOMSTEIN, Berlin

Pascal Friton, a partner in the BLOMSTEIN firm, Berlin, will discuss how the European Union’s member states are addressing exclusion and debarment, drawing on a piece he presented at the Thomson Reuters Government Contracts Year in Review in February 2019.  He also will be speaking on the afternoon of Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at this year’s Year in Review conference.

Collin Swan, World Bank

Collin Swan, of the World Bank’s Office of Suspension & Debarment, will discuss his office’s debarment survey and the office’s ongoing research into other debarment systems (beyond the United States and the World Bank).  See his FCPA Blog post on the survey.

Additional resources

Grace Sullivan, GWU Law

Grace Sullivan, a third-year student at the George Washington University Law School, recently won first prize in the Public Contract Law Journal annual writing contest for her note (which was also accepted for publication in the Journal). Her note analyzes three case studies of foreign contractors debarred by the U.S. government: Chinese telecommunications giants ZTE and Huawei, and Russian cybersecurity firm Kaspersky.  Ms. Sullivan will be presenting on her note at the March 2020 ABA PCLS Federal Procurement Institute in Annapolis, MD.

Dial-in Information:

If you are calling from the US, here are your instructions:

US Dial-in Number (local toll): (515) 606-5440

Access Code: 509353

If you are calling from outside the US, here are your instructions:

International local-toll dial-in numbers:  https://www.freeconferencecall.com/wall/sil_anticorruption/

Link to connect to call via computer: join.freeconferencecall.com/sil_anticorruption

Colloquium – Transnational Procurement – Turin, Italy – February 5, 2020

Turin colloquium, 5 February 2020

Professor Gabriella Racca hosted a colloquium on transnational procurement at the University of Turin on February 5, 2020. The discussion focused on a new book, Joint Public Procurement and Innovation: Lessons Across Borders (G. Racca & C. Yukins, eds., 2019). Further information is included in the accompanying flyer.

Gian Luigi Albano

Public Contracts in Legal Globalisation — Project on Contract Administration Disputes — Presentation on December 13, 2019

Professor Chris Jansen (VU Amsterdam) and Professor Patricia Valcárcel Fernández (University of Vigo), members of the academic consortium Public Contracts in Legal Globalisation, are undertaking a detailed (and quite interesting) study of contract administration law in the European Union, to assess the relationship between competition and contract administration.  They presented on this project at the consortium’s meeting at the University of Paris – Nanterre (La Defense campus) on December 13, 2019. They describe their project as follows:

Chris Jansen – VU Amsterdam

This project seeks to investigate, problematize, and clarify the possible interaction between the competition interest, as well as its regulation, inherent in competitive tendering on the one hand, and the execution of public contracts and concession contracts on the other. The project is based on the assumption that the particular factual and legal context of competitive tendering must be taken into account by the courts when they apply rules of substantive law in order to resolve issues related to the execution of contracts. If this assumption turns out to be correct, it would further mean that the resolving of issues by the courts could, in its turn, have an impact on the competition interest. If that is indeed proven to be the case, the results of the project could be relevant for the further debate on public procurement regulation. 

Based on the aforesaid assumptions, this project seeks to answer the following three research questions. (1) In the event that a national court of law must resolve issues regarding the execution of a public contract or a concession contract by applying rules of substantive law (general administrative law; general private law; common law, depending on the legal system concerned), will the court take into account the particular factual and legal context of the competitive tendering procedure? If so: how will the court do this? If not: why not? to indicate those rules that relate to the award of public contracts and concession contracts by means of competitive tendering procedures. Another factual difference relates to the bargaining power of the parties involved in the two situations. In the second situation, it is possible – although not necessarily so – that the two private parties will have had equal bargaining power when they negotiated the content of their contract. In the first situation, however, it is inherent in the competitive tendering procedure that the contracting authority will have had the power to dominate the content of the subsequent contract.(2) To what extent is it possible to problematize and/or unify the various approaches that are found in the answers to question (1)? (3) Based on the aforesaid analysis, to what extent is it possible and necessary to give recommendations to national courts, legislators and perhaps even the supranational legislators (e.g. the European Union) as regards the subject matter?  

As the project description suggests, this study relates directly to what may the next wave of reform in procurement in the European Union — a critical reassessment of public contract administration law (and forums), which is also a focus of the upcoming March 16, 2020 symposium at King’s College, London.

The full project description is included below.

Principles of Public Contracts in Europe – Conference at University Paris Est Créteil

On December 12, 2019 the University Paris Est Créteil hosts a conference on principles of public contracts in Europe, coordinated by Professor Stéphane de La Rosa, University Professor and Director of the Research Team MIL (Markets, Institutions and Liberties).

Panel III

Martin Raz – Havel & Partners – Czech Republic

Panel IV

Steven Van Garsse, Professeur à l’Université de Anvers (BE), Professor of Public Law – University of Anvers/Hasselt, on Principles of efficiency and effectiveness

Romélien Colavitti, Senior  Lecturer  in Public  Law – University of Valenciennes,  on The principles  governing  alternate modes of dispute resolution

Carole Cravero, PhD student University of Turin and University of Paris-West Nanterre, on The Principles of Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Contracts

Vincent Bouhier, Senior  Lecturer  and Dean – Evry-Paris Saclay University,  The Principle of Reciprocity 

Lt Col Daniel Schoeni, Judge Advocate, U.S. Air Force; PhD Candidate, University of Nottingham, Is the practice of negotiation in public contracts a common principle?

Christopher Yukins, Lynn David Research Professor of Government Procurement Law, George Washington University Law School; moderator

Poland’s Public Procurement Law Association — conference on grounds for exclusion in Europe and the United States

On September 30, 2019, at the University of Warsaw, the Public Procurement Law Association of Poland held a conference (program below) on exclusion of contractors (called “debarment” in the United States and elsewhere), which looked at rules and practices in the European Union (EU), the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the United States. The conference featured a report (below) summarizing procedures used in 31 EU and EFTA nations, which was sponsored by the Association. The presentation by Professor Christopher Yukins is also set forth below.

Prof. Michal Kania (U. Silesia) and Collin Swan (World Bank), presenters at the conference

ABA Public Contract Law Section – International Procurement Committee – Presentation on International Trade Agreements – October 10, 2019 – Noon to 1:30 pm

Join a special presentation on the United States’ international trade agreements in procurement. Chris Yukins and Allen Green will present on their chapter in The Contractor’s Guide to International Procurement (American Bar Association 2018) (Erin Loraine Felix & Marques Peterson, eds.). They will give an overview of international trade agreements, and discuss recent “Buy American” developments in the Trump administration. The program will be held at the Dentons law firm, 1900 K Street NW, from 12-1:30 pm. Lunch will be served.

Call-in information: +1-877-211-3621 Passcode: 788 499 1844

International Trade Agreements and U.S. Procurement Law

Chapter by Christopher R. Yukins & Allen B. Green, in The Contractor’s Guide to International Procurement (American Bar Association 2018) (Erin Loraine Felix & Marques Peterson, eds.)

Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3443244

Allen Green
Christopher Yukins

Some of the most difficult issues in U.S. procurement law stem from the nation’s several centuries of accumulated protectionist measures, and from a patchwork of trade agreements meant to contain that protectionism. These conflicting measures reflect a push-and-pull in U.S. procurement policy, between those who favor closed procurement markets and those who favor open competition; the compromises reached between the two camps have created a Byzantine set of rules and requirements. At the same time, though, this area of law holds a special promise for the future of procurement, for cross-border agreements currently offer the readiest means of erasing anti-competitive differences between national rules, by bringing many nations to a common standard of international best practice. To make sense of this complex area, this chapter proceeds in three parts. Part II reviews the major pieces of protectionist legislation passed by Congress, focusing first on the Buy American Act of 1933; this discussion also references some of the most important implementing regulations. Part III reviews the most important U.S. trade agreements which have limited the force of that protectionist legislation, including the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). Because barriers to procurement can also arise from structural factors — “non-tariff barriers to trade” which, in practice, may protect domestic vendors — this part also explains how the trade agreements mitigate those non-tariff barriers. Finally, Part IV concludes by offering some practical suggestions for those working in this field, and suggests a possible road ahead for cooperation in international procurement markets.

Yukins, Christopher R. and Green, Allen, International Trade Agreements and U.S. Procurement Law (2018). Chapter 9 to The Contractor’s Guide to International Procurement (American Bar Association 2018) (Erin Loraine Felix & Marques Peterson, eds.); GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2019-55; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-55. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3443244

Professor Piga Urges Italian Support for Small- and Medium-Sized Businesses in Response to Trump Buy American Initiative

Prof. Gustavo Piga

In an editorial published in Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Professor Gustavo Piga of the University of Rome – Tor Vergata, an activist in Italian politics and and a leader in the international procurement community, responded to an article by Christopher Yukins assessing the Trump administration’s latest Buy American initiative.  Professor Piga argued that, though the actual impact of the Trump order might be minimal (as Professor Yukins pointed out), Italian policymakers should emulate U.S. support for small businesses, which the U.S. undertakes through protectionist preferences.  Professor Piga closed:  “GliStatiUniti lo insegnano chiaramente: non pensando per le piccole, smettiamo di pensare in grande.”  (“The United States clearly teaches this:  by not thinking of the small, we stop thinking big.”).

4th European Conference on E-Public Procurement – Madrid – 13 May 2019

This is the fourth European conference on e-public procurement organized by the Portuguese Observatory of Technology Foresight (OPET), focusing on the European public procurement directives and their implementation in the European member states through e-procurement. The conference scientific committee is headed by Professor Luis Valaderes Tavares, and the conference program is here.

King’s College, London Postgraduate Diploma: Public Procurement Regulation in the EU and in its Global Context

On March 5, 2019 Christopher Yukins joined a videoconference for King’s College, London’s online diploma course on EU and global procurement law. His slides are below. On April 24, 2020, he joined them for a supplemental class by Zoom videoconference (linked below).

Class Video – Supplemental Class – April 24, 2020