Discussieproject 2010

Day 1

The first day of the discussion week: January 18, 2010. We all gathered at the Counsel for Jurisdiction at 8:15 am. Not to forget it was a Monday morning, so everyone was half asleep. At 8:30 Marthe Ferf, specialised at International Law, started the presentation about Maritime Law. Many things were discussed, like Hugo de Groot, the history of Law of the Sea and the Maritime zones, but the main question was: Who owns the sea? The big problem is that we do not have an answer for that. This week we will try to discuss this topic, by looking at the Maritime law in different points of view.

After this presentation we went to the famous Peace Palace, and we got a tour through this beautiful building, from 10:00 till 11:00. The tour guide told us much about the courts that were in the rooms of this palace, and even more about (the interior of) the building itself.

After a lunch break of one hour Roos van Ees and Tamar Schats held a presentation about Whale War. We got information about the history of whaling and some questions we need to ask our self this week.

Because of the incident between the Japanese ship and Sea Shepherd we had a main thesis to discuss about: Should the Dutch government support Sea Shepherd? Every group got 45 minutes to practice their statements before the debate began. We noticed that everyone was really serious about this topic and that made the whole debate more interesting. Which was surprising, because it was the first time they had to debate in English.

The upcoming days we will post our experiences on this blog. If you are a little interested and have something to say, please email us: discussieprojecthml@gmail.com

Day 2

Today was the second day of our discussionproject, and unlike yesterday, this day was completely at school.

We started at 8:30 in de KH with looking at a presentation by Gjalt Elenbaas, a lawyer who’s an expert in the field of the maritime law and the relation with the government. One hour later, when mr Elenbaas had finished his presentation, everybody got their statement, the statement that they will have to defend or shatter in court on friday, and thereafter we got lessons from our own teachers about these statements.

After the intermission that followed the lessons, 4 of the 5 groups went to the KH to see the eye-opening documantare ‘the End of the Line’, about the overfishing. The other group was preparing their interview with Claire Groenewegen, so they had to see the movie later. Did you know that if we continue with fishing as much as we do, the seas will be as good as empty in 2048?

The afternoon was used to prepare other interviews, to search for information about the statements, and anthropologist Marloes Kraan was interviewed.

Tomorrow we’ll have a guided tour by Dienst Noordzee in Rijswijk, and will we continue with the gathering of information, so we’ll be beter prepared in court on friday.

Day 3

It is the third day of our project week. In two days, 5 theses will be attacked and defended at the High Court. We listened to two presentations. Two groups had an interview with Ton IJlstra and another group went to the Shell lab to talk about their thesis.

This morning we went to Rijkswaterstaat Noordzee to listen to a presentation of Mr. Ad Stolk. He told us about the North Sea, the Eurogeul in Rotterdam and sand mining. After a short intermission there was another presentation by Daniel de Groot. Unlike Mr. Ad Stolk he talked about the economical part of the North Sea.

After that, everyone went back to school. One group went to the Shell Lab, while two groups with the subject ‘fishery’ had an interview with Mr. Ton IJlstra. He is a leader of projects at the ministry of agriculture, nature and food quality. In the past, he made a law and had several jobs, like being the head of the Maasvlakte 2 project. Group two started with the interview with the statement ‘Fishing in the fishing grounds of the North sea is only allowed with given permission from the United Nations.’. The second group had the statement ‘Fishing on protected species or transgressing fixed fishing quota must be penalized by the withdrawal of fishing permits of the country to which the shipping company of the offender belongs.’ Both groups talked about the pros and the cons. And asked him questions to make their plea better.

Today was the last day to gather arguments for the pleas. Tomorrow will be a writing day, everyone will be writing their speeches, practice their plea and prepare for the debate on Friday.

Day 4

Thursday we had a day with not that much on the programme. Everyone had to work really hard today, because all the speeches had to be written today. Tomorrow is the last day of our project week, so today we had to stress a lot. Then we will be at the High Court and debate against each other while a professional judge will be judging us.

Everyone was stressing out about their speeches and were working really heard until noon, while the reporters were writing interviews and they were checking everything that was written this whole week. Then it was time to read the arguments of their opponents and prepare for a test debate.

This debate was a little bit different, each groups read their own speech. After that they practised the ‘asking question’ part.

Tomorrow will be the last day of the project. Today was an exhausting day, but everyone really put their effort in it and we are ready for the big day.

Day 5

Eventhough we just started to like it, our project is almost finished. This is already the last day of our week, and on that day the great debates we´ve been telling you about will finally be a fact. Today started, like most other days, at the HML. Although we were to leave at a quarter past nine, some of us were already here at half past eight, just to make shure they would not be too late.

Every debate had one division:

The first plea by the pros
The second plea by the cons
The first refutation by the pros
The second refutation by the cons
Everybody in the courtroom writes his question on a paper
The judges pick out some good questions, and they ask them
Both groups answer the questions
A summary-speech by the pros
A summary-speech by the cons
The judges take their time to discuss, while the next teams prepare for their debates

The debates were given in the building of the High Court of the Netherlands. There were four judges, one of them being our own headmaster, Hugo. After the debates these judges decided which team was the most convincing, and who was the best speaker of the day.

The debates were alternated with two intermissions. The first one was about fourty minutes, and the second intermission, in which we had to leave the building, was one hour.

After all the debates, around half past three, everybody was cooked, but satisfied. The judges went to another room to deliberate, and after ten minutes they came back with their verdict. The best speaker was Enya, the best coorporation was in the group of Sven, Nina V., Merel and Sander, and the most convincing group was the group of April, Fleur, Felix, Stanley and Divya.

At four o’clock Hugo did his final story, and with the last word ‘Weekend!’ we all went home. We all learned a lot this week, and, eventhough we didn’t believe that it would be, it was quite fun!