University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series

University of Virginia John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper Series

 

A Critique of the Odious Debt Doctrine

Albert H. Choi, University of Virginia School of Law
Eric Posner, University of Chicago Law School

Abstract

Defenders of the odious debt doctrine, which bars creditors from collecting sovereign debts that financed the personal consumption of former dictators, argue that this rule would benefit populations following dictatorships and discourage would-be dictators from staging coups in the first place. We show that optimism about the doctrine is based on unrealistic assumptions about the motives and practices of dictators. With more realistic assumptions, the odious debt doctrine could be beneficial or harmful, depending on circumstances. Defenders of the doctrine have not made the empirical case that the net benefits would be positive if the doctrine were incorporated into international law, and there is ample reason for skepticism that they would be.

Subject Area

International Law, Law and Economics

Recommended Citation

Albert H. Choi and Eric Posner, "A Critique of the Odious Debt Doctrine" (June 2007). University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series. University of Virginia John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper Series. Working Paper 35.
http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/olin/art35

No readers' reactions have been posted for this article. To submit one, copy the URL for this article (http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/olin/art35) and click here.