This book outlines how odious debts are not legally binding under international or domestic law, contrary to widely held legal opinion.

According to the doctrine of odious debt, loans which are knowingly provided to subjugate or defraud the population of a debtor state are not legally binding against that state under international law. Breaking with widespread scepticism, this groundbreaking book reaffirms the original doctrine through a meticulous and definitive examination of state practice and legal history. It restates the doctrine by introducing a new classification of odious debts and defines 'odiousness' by reference to the current, much more determinate and litigated framework of existing public international law. Acknowledging that much of sovereign debt is now governed by the private law of New York and England, Jeff King explores how 'odious debts' in international law should also be regarded as contrary to public policy in private law. This book is essential reading for practising lawyers, scholars, and development and human rights workers.

According to the doctrine of odious debt, loans which are knowingly provided to subjugate or defraud the population of a debtor state are not legally binding against that state under international law. Breaking with widespread scepticism, this groundbreaking book reaffirms the original doctrine through a meticulous and definitive examination of state practice and legal history. It restates the doctrine by introducing a new classification of odious debts and defines 'odiousness' by reference to the current, much more determinate and litigated framework of existing public international law. Acknowledging that much of sovereign debt is now governed by the private law of New York and England, Jeff King explores how 'odious debts' in international law should also be regarded as contrary to public policy in private law. This book is essential reading for practising lawyers, scholars, and development and human rights workers.

Conventional wisdom holds that all nations must repay debt. Regardless of the legitimacy of the regime that signs the contract, a country that fails to honor its obligations damages its reputation. Yet should today's South Africa be responsible for apartheid-era debt? Is it reasonable to tether postwar Iraq with Saddam Hussein's excesses? Rethinking Sovereign Debt is a probing analysis of how sovereign debt continuity--the rule that nations should repay loans even after a major regime change, or else expect consequences--became dominant. Odette Lienau contends that the practice is not essential for functioning capital markets, and demonstrates its reliance on absolutist ideas that have come under fire over the last century. Lienau traces debt continuity from World War I to the present, emphasizing the role of government officials, the World Bank, and private markets in shaping our existing framework. Challenging previous accounts, she argues that Soviet Russia's repudiation of Tsarist debt and Great Britain's 1923 arbitration with Costa Rica hint at the feasibility of selective debt cancellation. Rethinking Sovereign Debt calls on scholars and policymakers to recognize political choice and historical precedent in sovereign debt and reputation, in order to move beyond an impasse when a government is overthrown.

''Yvonne Wong''s book is one of the best treatments of the Odious Debt problem in the literature. It is thorough, balanced and yet manages to be creative. I have already used an early version in my International Debt class and the discussions that were generated were excellent. For anyone seeking to tackle this age old problem, I highly recommend this book.'' Mitu Gulati, Duke University, US''With some excellent historical research and important analysis of "odious debt" accumulation and sovereign debt restructuring mechanisms in modern times, this book is placing the issue of "odious debt" at the heart of International law. Thus, it will prove an indispensable companion to any scholar or policy-maker who wishes to gain a multi-prismatic understanding of "odious debt" illegality and its implications for the welfare of entire nations.'' Emilios Avgouleas, University of Edinburgh, UK''Whenever a strict application of the law produces a result that is at variance with a general sense of what is morally right, trouble is surely in the offing. This is the central thesis of Yvonne Wong''s Sovereign Finance and the Poverty of Nations. When is it legally permissible, when is it ethically acceptable, for a sovereign borrower to disavow a debt incurred in the name of the sovereign state, but not for its (or its citizens'') benefit? And if debts incurred by unscrupulous politicians in one era can be disowned by their successors later on under gauzy notions of "illegitimacy" or "odiousness", what will prevent future unscrupulous politicians from casually dishonoring sovereign obligations that they would just prefer not to pay? These are deep waters, legally and morally. Wong has given us a fascinating insight into one of the most disquieting issues in international financial law.'' Lee C. Buchheit, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, US''This book provides a very valuable contribution to the discussion about odious debts in that it, quite successfully, structures the often rather elusive argumentation. By developing a new and stringent approach to the emergence of a valid legal concept of odious debts, the author presents a fresh perspective to its underlying evaluations and allows, thus, a re-consideration of the need for effective rules in this context. This book will certainly influence fundamentally the future debate of odious debts.'' Christoph G. Paulus, Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany''Saddam Hussein was overthrown and executed, but his successors to power are still liable for the debts that he contracted for the nation. Odious regimes can create debts without consent or benefit of their citizens who must subsequently repay them. This fact puzzles both international law specialists and intellectuals who read magazines like The Economist. Theresult seems wrong, but the right solution is elusive. Yvonne Wong''s important and timely book solves some of the puzzles by using methods and theories from international law, economics, and political science. It explains the law and politics inherent in sovereign debt arrangements, and proposes a new legal framework for odious debt.'' From the foreword by Robert CooterNational debts incurred by illegitimate regimes against the best interests of the citizens is a serious problem of international economics and politics. These sovereign debts, often referred to as odious debts, deplete the public purse and create an ongoing financial liability that serves to constrain investment and economic growth, and conspires to keep millions in poverty. This important and timely book explains the legal principles and politics involved in the issue of odious debts, and sovereign debt arrangements more generally. The author goes beyond abstract arguments and proposes legal rules and international regulation that should be put in place to create the right incentives to stop the transmission of odious debts. Her proposal is for a registration scheme for sovereign debt, and the imposition of positive duties on financiers who provide loans to sovereign borrowers.Sovereign Finance and the Poverty of Nations will appeal to students, academics, debtactivists, policymakers, international finance practitioners and anyone with a general interest in sovereign finance affairs.

International law obliges states to respect their obligations in accordance with the principle of pacta sunt servanda unless the obligation is odious. Citizens of any state should depend on state practice and judicial precedent to repudiate obligation that originated odiously. Jurisprudential and legal controversy arose about the extent of the state's commitment with debt arising from those obligations. Jurisprudence and the judiciary tried to set a definition of odious debt since the eighteenth century. The difficulty of the definition arises in determining when and how debt is odious, and what are the criteria of odious debt. Another difficulty arises in finding sources of international law to cancel and reject such debt. This paper will be primarily concerned with identifying the precise definition of and normative basis for the doctrine of odious debt in international law. It also concerned with the international legal standards that states can rely on to get rid of that debt. The legal principles are founded on the sources of international law laid down in Article 38 of the Statute of ICJ. Through a review of different sources of international law, the conclusion is that odious debts arise without the consent of the population, without benefit to them, and with the knowledge of the creditor. The paper also concludes that there are at least three legal grounds for repudiating odious debt.

An account of how Third World debt accumulated to its current staggering levels. It examines the role of the different participants responsible among both the lenders and the borrowers and looks at the consequences for the debtor countries.