(April 15, 2008) In their paper’s abstract, Gulati and Ludington set out to expose the “murky reality” of the life of Alexander Nahum Sack, and how this reality conflicts with the “myth perpetuated in the odious debts literature.” The dominant theme, though insinuated rather than stated clearly, is that the odious debts movement has deliberately exaggerated Sack’s eminence in order to establish the doctrine as customary international law. The authors also make few distinctions among the various organizations in the debt forgiveness movement. I would recommend that the authors stick to the facts rather than assign motives, and be precise in their charges rather than employing broad brushes.

(February 29, 2008) A letter from NGOs to Ban Ki-Moon regarding external debt.

(February 1, 2008) South Africa’s widely commended Truth & Reconciliation Commission has a blind spot. Surprisingly, no attention appears to have been given to the foreign corporations, individual investors and Western governments that helped create and sustain the racial dictatorship which came to be known as apartheid.

(November 20, 2007) Neil Watkins, National Coordinator of Jubilee USA Network, testified before the Congressional House Committee on Financial Services considering the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Cancellation of 2007, earlier this month.

(November 7, 2007) Current odious debt doctrine Рusing the term “doctrine” loosely, since it has never formally been adopted by a court or international decision maker – dates back to a 1927 treatise by a wandering Russian academic named Alexander Sack.

(November 2, 2007) This is Jeff King’s second major work on the doctrine of odious debts, the first being the landmark study he produced with Ashfaq Khalfan and Bryan Thomas on behalf of the Centre for International Sustainable Development Law at McGill University in 2001 (and finalized in 2003). Like the first, this one is full of important legal history and arguments that odious debt advocates will want to know.