My artistic practice deals with documents and, more specifically, with the use and the exploration of their narrative potential. This dissertation is about three different cycles of artworks I... Show moreMy artistic practice deals with documents and, more specifically, with the use and the exploration of their narrative potential. This dissertation is about three different cycles of artworks I produced as part of the research project. The notion of animation inheres in each of the three case studies: – Case 1 focuses on my artworks about Simone Pianetti (1858-?), an Italian mass murderer who escaped and disappeared, and who then became a puppet character, animated as a stock character.– Case 2 focuses on Augusto Masetti (1888-1966), an Italian soldier who shot at his superior officer and declared not to remember having done it, as if in a state of ecstatic possession, as if animated by an external entity. Mainly using publications and workshops, I produced a series of artworks related to legal, medical and anarchist records on his case.– Case 3 follows the appearance of a puppet character in Colombia, el espiritado, and its supposed connections to the Masetti case. I describe a series of artistic works I produced, starting from a puppet script about the self-destruction of a village, which can be read as a commentary on puppetry, anarchism and animation. Show less
The research examines publically known investor-state cases, supplemented by views of leading commentators, to identify evidentiary principles dealing with burden of proof, standard of proof,... Show moreThe research examines publically known investor-state cases, supplemented by views of leading commentators, to identify evidentiary principles dealing with burden of proof, standard of proof, presumptions and inferences. In this research, I conclude that investor-state tribunals have indeed recognized and applied evidentiary principles on burden of proof, standard of proof, presumptions and inferences. These principles do not always flow from the generally accepted view on arbitral discretion. Rather, these principles have been generally recognized under the rubric of general principles of law. I conclude that the failure to meet the evidentiary principle can have consequences, although the precise consequence varies based on the principle. For example, the failure to meet some of the principles (e.g., burden of proof) can have very severe consequences (e.g., annulment of an ICSID award) but for other principles like whether or not a tribunal should draw an inference would depend on its assessment of the evidence and, therefore, as a general matter cannot be the subject of an annulment. Show less
