This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Pamela Young


night to flee the wars of independence and geno- cides that swept the African continent and Asia in the 1950s and 1960s.


Pamela nevertheless found many outlets for her compassion. She spoke often of the joy she felt when she was able to use her position to bring a bolt of fabric, a box of toys, or a bag of school- books to the impoverished women and children she encountered in her travels. By day she was engaged with the people and activities that often overlooked the more mundane interests of the lo- cal population, but in her spare time she relished the opportunity to perform the small acts that made major differences in their world.


90


When the family was assigned to a Canadian post in the late 1960s, Pamela was finally able to settle in and focus on her children. Soon thereafter her husband left, and they eventually divorced. As a single mother who had forgone her own educa- tion for her husband’s career, and with a house full of children, she had very few options for em- ployment in Canada. Feeling that her diplomatic experience gave her the best chance at a career capable of providing for her family, she moved to Washington, DC, in the early 1970s. She was in- troduced through friends to the Jessup Competi- tion, and began volunteering. In 1974, ILSA (then the ASILS) and the ASIL realized that they had found an invaluable resource and agreed to split her salary so that she could join the Competition on a full-time basis.


At the time, the Jessup Competition was still a fledgling effort. The first permanent director had been hired several years before, and only several dozen law faculties participated. International law was not yet a prominent educational offer- ing. Many of the rules and procedures that drive the Competition we know today were still being conceived. Business was conducted via mail and telex, and global contacts that can be concluded in minutes today took weeks, or even months, to unfold. It required many talents to pull together, while benefitting hundreds of young idealistic law-


yers hoping to bring about a better world, and Pa- mela Young thrived in the Jessup environment.


She reveled in each new team contact the office received, and immediately set about championing their cause. Her boundless charm and impeccable social skills drew an ever-expanding network of academics, lawyers, diplomats, and students to the effort. Her knowledge of cultural differences, event planning and the intricacies of embassy and diplomatic processes made her an invaluable re- source. She never declined a challenge, and be- came the force of consistency that ensured the Jessup’s continued success.


When I began my term as International Adminis- trator in 1992, Pamela had just retired (the first time). But after several weeks of overlap, I recog- nized that we simply wouldn’t survive if Pamela didn’t remain for at least awhile and help us record everything she managed. After several weeks of strong convincing, and a chat with her family, we arranged for Pam to remain for two more years.


It was probably one of the most important deci- sions the Competition ever made.


At the time, teams still mailed memorials (20 of each side) to the Jessup office every year. These had to be tracked and organized for mailing to judges (boxes ran down the hallways). Judges themselves were tracked on index cards, and scheduling was done on a massive, wall-sized grid with names written on tape. Team scheduling was done in a notebook, via multiple rounds of trial and error that often took several days. Scoring was done by hand. Our 30-page newsletter was hand-typed by Pam on an IBM typewriter (in three column format!). Looking back, it’s somewhat amazing that such a small staff could even make the Jessup happen - but it had been this way for as long as anyone remembered.


I was reminded every day of my term that it all worked because of Pam. Each successive di- rector would enter the office with grand dreams and ambitious schemes to expand the Competi-


ILSA Quarterly » volume 20 » issue 4 » May 2012


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96