From Preparation to Performance: Inside UTokyo's IHL Competition Journey

I. Coaches' Reflections: Guiding the Next Generation of IHL Advocates

Suyeon: This year, the University of Tokyo participated in the 2025 International Humanitarian Law Competition, organized by the International Committee of the Red Cross. As a collective, our purpose in taking part is to raise awareness of international humanitarian and human rights law—fields that, despite their global importance, are often underrepresented within traditional legal education. 

Last year, our team established the first-ever student association at UTokyo dedicated to IHL, now known as the University of Tokyo International Humanitarian Law Student Association, IHLSA, in short. As both a founding member and its leader, it has been really rewarding to see how much student interest and engagement have grown. I, on behalf of all of us at UTIHLSA, hope this momentum continues to grow in the years to come!

Hannah: I had the great honour of being a coach in the first generation of UTIHLSA. This year, we were lucky to have many enthusiastic participants in both the Moot Court and Role Play competitions. As a coach, I drew on my experience from IHL competitions last year to structure study sessions, mock moot and role play sessions and give feedback. IHL is full of complexities and nuance so it was my goal to give the next batch of participants a running start for their competitions.

Coaching is an extremely rewarding experience. When coaching moot court, I could really see the team progress in how they managed time, answered questions, developed legal reasoning and in their overall confidence. I hope that future generations of IHL competition participants will continue this coaching tradition. My only regret from coaching is that I couldn’t support the teams in person!

Hitoha: As a coach currently based in Japan, I had the opportunity to volunteer at this year’s Roleplay National Round. Volunteering this time reminded me of how much IHL education can empower and connect people. Having also coached this year’s UTokyo team, it was incredibly rewarding to witness their growth through their performances. I am deeply grateful to the organizers, participants, and fellow volunteers for their passion and dedication. It was truly meaningful to give back to the same community that inspired me just one year ago.

For future applicants, joining UTIHLSA is not only about gaining knowledge and practical experience in IHL. It also means becoming part of a community that supports its juniors, shares accumulated expertise year after year, and grows together through both competition and collaboration. Our teams succeed because they learn from those who came before them, and because they in turn pass on that insight. I hope more students will experience this environment and discover how transformative it can be.

II. Moot Court Team Reflections

The Challenges During the Preparation and the Competition

Marie: The primary challenge for me lay in the distillation of our arguments. Acting as the Prosecution, we were tasked with formulating submissions that were both impartial and persuasive. Over the three-month preparation period, our team researched as much information as time allowed us, with our notes extending to nearly 90 pages. The real challenge, however, was the judicious refining of this material into a 4,000-word summary of arguments (Memorial) and an 18-minute oral pleading per person. I was therefore delighted that our efforts were recognised and crystallised with the Best Memorial Award. It was rewarding to hear the judges describe our Memorial as both organised and comprehensive.

Evelyne: The main challenge for me was juggling full-time coursework alongside the demands of moot preparation, especially while learning international humanitarian law largely from scratch. The subject matter was unfamiliar at the outset, and getting up to speed on the framework, case law, and procedural aspects required a significant time commitment. Balancing this with regular classes meant that preparation often had to be done under time pressure, which was challenging but ultimately sharpened my ability to prioritise and work efficiently.

Haruka: The biggest challenge for me was mastering legal knowledge in a short period and learning how to handle the judges’ questions. In moot court competition, it was not just about knowing the laws and cases, but we had to grasp the judges’  intent and respond appropriately. I joined the competition because of my interest in IHL, but through practice with my professor, I truly realized my lack of knowledge and performance skills. I spent many days researching, practicing, and repeatedly watching past competitions on YouTube all day long.

What Carried the Team to the Semi-Finals?

Marie: I would say a combination of continuous practice and a spirit of collaboration until the very last moment was the driving force. We were incredibly fortunate to have the guidance of Professor Kihara-Hunt, whose consistent support and genuine care for both the material and our well-being kept the team’s morale high. Our coaches were also instrumental, whose insightful feedback was promptly available despite the geographical distance and the time difference (of 8/9 hours!). Lastly, my talented teammates. Their mutual respect made our oral practice sessions and late-night Zoom calls not just productive but truly and pleasingly memorable. It was these collaborative works that ultimately carried us through to the semi-finals.

Evelyne: What worked especially well was the patient and steady guidance from our professor, Professor Kihara-Hunt,  and coaches throughout the preparation process. They were generous with their time and consistently willing to walk us through difficult points, refine our arguments, and provide constructive feedback. Having that support made a real difference, particularly given that many of us were still building our foundations in IHL. Their encouragement created a supportive environment that allowed us to improve steadily and approach competition day with greater confidence!

Haruka: I believe the key was the extensive practice I had with my teammates and my professor leading up to the competition. My professor spent so much time helping us with oral submissions that I never lost my confidence, even when I found myself in an unfamiliar environment on the day of the competition. Instead of being intimidated, I actually found the judges’ questions interesting and truly enjoyed the oral submission. Having my teammates by my side —those I spent a lot of time together researching and practicing — was also incredibly reassuring.

Key Takeaways from the Competition?

Marie: Reflecting on the experience, my fundamental takeaway is the importance of dialogue-led advocacy. In today’s increasingly complex and ambiguous world, precise knowledge of facts and jurisprudence is merely the starting point. The real skill lies in guiding the judges through cogent and constructive dialogue rather than simply reciting law and listing evidence. While comprehensive legal and factual knowledge is essential, I have learned that flexibility and a spirit of collaboration (not only to one’s teammates but also to decision-makers) are what allow us to navigate uncertainty in pursuit of a more just world. 

Evelyne: One of my main takeaways is that it is important not to be overly pessimistic about international humanitarian law and international human rights law. While they may have limitations, the competition reminded me that international governance does not operate in a vacuum. Legal frameworks, institutions, and advocacy still matter, and they continue to shape how norms are articulated and applied. Engaging with these systems reinforced my belief that, despite their imperfections, IHL and IHRL remain relevant and must continue to be taken seriously.

Haruka: First of all, receiving feedback directly from the professors who served as judges was a great experience. They pointed out perspectives we had not considered before, which made me realize just how fascinating a moot court can be. Also, through the preparation, we dived into so many IHL cases and treaty provisions, teaching me far more than what I could have learned in a standard class. Discussing cases and planning strategies for the competition with my teammates and professor was a very special memory for me. It was a great way to put what I learned into practice.

III. Roleplay Team Reflections

Unique Challenges of Roleplay

Evelyne: One of the main challenges of the roleplay was acting out the scenario convincingly without feeling overly self-conscious, while at the same time demonstrating a clear understanding of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Unlike written submissions or oral pleadings, the roleplay required us to think on our feet and express legal reasoning through interaction rather than structured argument. Finding a balance between performance and substance was difficult at first, but became more manageable with practice.

Yewon: One of the challenges during preparation was translating abstract legal standards into responses that felt realistic within the roleplay setting. Unlike traditional moot courts, where arguments can be carefully structured and refined, the roleplay required immediate reactions to evolving facts and pressure from other actors. This made it difficult for our team to rely on memorized arguments and instead demanded a deeper internalization of IHL and IHRL principles. During the competition itself, maintaining legal precision while responding quickly and persuasively, as well as making sure everyone in the team was participating on similar levels, under time pressure was particularly challenging.

Aditi:  During the preparation, one of my main concerns was how to effectively memorise and internalise the complex rules and legal frameworks of International Humanitarian Law (IHL within a limited time frame), particularly identifying which legal provisions would apply to specific scenarios. In addition to this, another challenge lay in fully grasping the gravity and realism of the situations presented in a simulation setting. While simulations aim to replicate real-world conflicts, the absence of immediate human suffering and real consequences can make it difficult to fully appreciate the ethical weight and urgency of decision-making under IHL. This sometimes creates a gap between theoretical legal knowledge and its practical application, requiring conscious effort to treat each scenario with the seriousness it demands.

Key Takeaways?

Evelyne: What went particularly well was the strong support we received from our coaches and Professor Kihara-Hunt throughout the preparation process. They helped us think through a wide range of possible scenarios and responses, which made us better prepared for the uncertainty inherent in roleplay. Their guidance encouraged us to focus not only on legal accuracy, but also on how law operates in real-world, high-pressure situations.

Yewon: A key takeaway from the competition was the importance of adaptability and teamwork in applied international law settings. The preparation process showed me that knowing the law is only one part of effective advocacy; equally important is the ability to listen, adjust strategies, and coordinate with teammates in real time. I also gained a clearer appreciation of how IHL and IHRL intersect in complex situations, and how legal decision-making often involves weighing competing obligations rather than applying rules mechanically. Overall, I think that the competition deepened my understanding of how international law functions in practice rather than in theory alone.

Aditi: During the preparation phase, one of my main concerns was how to effectively internalize the numerous rules and principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) within a limited period of time, particularly understanding which legal frameworks apply to specific scenarios. In addition, grasping the gravity and realism of the situations presented in a simulation setting was initially challenging, as it requires translating abstract legal norms into practical decision-making under pressure.

Despite not having a strong prior background in IHL, the preparation process provided me with a valuable opportunity to familiarize myself with key aspects of the field. This included understanding the roles of institutions such as the ICRC and OHCHR during armed conflicts, as well as the legal status of refugees and refugee camps, terrorists, and non-state armed groups. Through the competition, we gained insight into how high-profile international proceedings are conducted and how, as officers within a peacekeeping organization, our decisions can meaningfully influence outcomes on the ground. Furthermore, the simulation significantly enhanced my ability to think quickly and respond appropriately, as participants are required to make spontaneous yet well-reasoned decisions under time constraints.

What made Roleplay distinctive?

Evelyne: What made the roleplay especially distinctive was the degree of flexibility it demanded. There was no fixed procedure or single “correct” way of proceeding. Instead, we had to adapt continuously to how the situation unfolded. This reinforced the importance of responsiveness and judgment, and highlighted that effective engagement with IHL and IHRL often requires adjusting one’s approach to the realities on the ground rather than rigidly adhering to a predetermined script.

Yewon: The competition was both demanding and rewarding, particularly because of the roleplay format. What I think is special about roleplay is that it blurs the line between legal analysis and practical decision-making. Instead of delivering prepared submissions, we had to engage dynamically with the judges and other participants, and respond to unexpected turns in the scenario. This made the experience feel closer to real-world humanitarian work, where legal actors must operate under uncertainty and incomplete information.

Aditi: During the preparation phase, one of my main concerns was how to memorise and internalise the numerous rules and laws of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) relevant to the anticipated scenarios within a limited period of time. In addition to this, distinguishing which legal provisions applied to specific situations was particularly challenging. Another difficulty was grasping the gravity of the situations presented in a simulated environment, as simulations, by nature, cannot fully replicate the emotional and moral weight of real-world armed conflicts.

Thank you for reading! 

Applications for UTokyo’s IHLSA team will open in April,

so please continue to support us!