Challenge

Alber & Geiger was able to bring out the extraterritorial reach of EU human rights. This was against the backdrop of its clients having lost all available domestic remedies. The Former Minister of Economic Development of Azerbaijan and his brother were arrested on the eve of the Azerbaijani election. Initially accused of attempting a putsch, they were ultimately found liable for embezzlement. The European Court of Human Rights had held that the several of their rights had been infringed, especially the right to a fair trial. Nevertheless the Aliyevs remained imprisoned under their disproportionate and potentially wrongful sentences.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger’s strategy utilized the EU-Azerbaijan trade talks to leverage the EU institutional playmakers at opportune moments. Our litigious narrative extracted the EU’s human rights obligations underlying the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), and demonstrated the innocence of the Aliyev’s.

Simultaneously we drew on the Aliyev’s pro-western views, showing through adversarial fact finding that this underlay their imprisonment. Substantively, we put forward that it was incumbent on the Azerbaijani authorities under these circumstances to show their commitment to the rule of law. In order to benefit from the ENP they had to play by its rules.

Results

Ultimately we secured a complete pardon for both of the Aliyevs. However, the broader reach of this mandate was the raising of awareness regarding human rights issues in Azerbaijan. This put the EU-Azerbaijani relationship on a trajectory of greater trust. The sensitive political dynamics were tackled head on and resolved with expedience.

Challenge

The patent holder of Teflon™, US Fortune 500 chemical company Chemours, approached Alber & Geiger seeking regulatory and advocacy support over a European Union proposal that would ban all per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Those PFAS are chemicals that came under regulatory fire as being the so called “forever chemicals”, which persist in the environment. The political turbulences in the EU started in the Netherlands, continued in Italy and Germany then, until they became an EU wide regulatory initiative in Brussels.

Strategy

On the one hand we were confronted with planned PFAS bans in The Hague, Rome and Berlin which we had to politically manage with the national governments. On the other hand we saw a regulatory initiative develop in Brussels under the EU chemicals strategy. We embarked on a defense for the Chemours specific PFAS named GenX and Teflon™, based on the planned PFAS restrictions. Considering the impact of the restrictions to the supply chains of various Member States, Alber & Geiger entered into discussions with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the European Commission, the European Parliament, the EU Permanent Representations and the Member States’ Ministries of Industry and Environment.

Results

We managed to stop the national PFAS bans in The Hague, Berlin and Rome. And we aligned them with the EU initiative. There, we made EU regulators and lawmakers understand that they needed to differentiate between different PFAS, such as PFAS of high or low concern, as a liquid, gas or solid material.

Challenge

The Giurgiulesti port of Chișinău in Moldova is an important strategic hub for all shipping to the black sea. It is a high EU political strategic value with regard to neighboring Russia.

In Moldova, we were faced with the task of steering tough EU diplomatic entanglements, in a direction that secured justice for our Azerbaijani client. The client was an important investor in Moldova. His interests in the Moldovan port which also involved huge EBRD investments had been compromised by an EU national.
Our client had sought a solution in Moldovan courts. After a freezing order in his favour was miraculously lifted, in the context of public statements from EU officials, he was concerned about the rule of law, independence of judiciary and the respective safety of his assets in this potential EU member state – and reached out to our team.

Strategy

The strategy was a bold venture into the multi-layered external relations boundaries that have been blurring due process. We reminded the EU that it had an obligation to uphold the rule of law in a potential EU accession country even if the result geopolitically would favor potentially Russian interests.

Results

The EU was ultimately content with making a neutral statement that did not implicate its integrity. It resulted in substantive justice for the client, and created a more positive relationship with the EU institutions.