scholarly journals International investment law in support of the right to development?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Ole Kristian Fauchald
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Policy Space ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Right To Development ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Investment

Abstract There is a long-standing claim and ambition in international investment law that treaties and customary law contribute to economic development in countries hosting investment. However, this claim remains controversial and has been hotly debated among academics. The article explores how international investment law, understood as international investment agreements (IIAs) and their associated dispute settlement mechanisms, can support the right to development. It does so by analysing how rules regarding protection and flow of foreign direct investment have and can contribute to realizing the right to development and help achieve sustainable development goals. It finds that IIAs have had limited effects for promotion of investment into or restricting the policy space for least developed and low-income countries. It argues that potential effects of IIAs cannot be properly understood without taking into account other means of protecting and promoting foreign direct investment, i.e., national investment legislation and contracts. So far, national investment legislation is likely to have had more significant impact on flows of foreign direct investment and policy space of host countries than IIAs. Reforms of IIAs to increase synergies with the right to development will, therefore, have to be based on knowledge about and assessments of the dynamics between IIAs, domestic investment legislation, and investment contracts.

Malaysia and Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Learning From Experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 890-917 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sufian Jusoh ◽  
Muhammad Faliq Abd Razak ◽  
Mohamad Azim Mazlan
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Learning From Experience ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaties

Abstract Malaysia is an important destination for foreign direct investment and has signed more than 70 investment guarantee agreements. Most allow investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and Malaysia has been subject to three claims, including two fully argued cases: Philippe Gruslin and Malaysian Historical Salvor. Yet Malaysian companies have also utilised ISDS provisions: in MTD Equity Bhd v Chile, Telekom Malaysia v Ghana, and Ekran Berhad v China (the first-ever ISDS claim against China). These cases provide lessons for Malaysia in becoming better prepared to negotiate newer generations of investment treaties, and to defend further potential cases. Malaysia has not reacted negatively to investment treaties despite the cases filed against the country. In fact, in light of its evolving interests Malaysia has become more of a rule-maker in international investment law rather than a rule-taker. Malaysia thereby continues to liberalise its investment regime and provide better transparency – the best defence against claims.

International Investment Law and Practice in the Kingdom of Cambodia: An Evolving ‘Rule Taker’?

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 942-973
Author(s):  
Romesh Weeramantry
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Court System ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

Abstract Cambodia has undertaken several initiatives to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), which has been growing rapidly in recent years, particularly through participating in Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) investment agreements and free trade agreements (FTAs). This article first outlines Cambodia’s arbitration law and practice, its Law on Investment, the court system, problems relating to corruption, and foreign direct investment (FDI) patterns. It then surveys trends in Cambodia’s comparatively belated signing of investment treaties, and their main contents (including recent treaties with India and Hungary, adopting very different models). The article then discusses the only investment arbitration instituted against Cambodia, which was successfully defended, followed by a comment on the future prospects for Cambodia’s investment treaty program.

The Legal Framework for the Protection of Foreign Direct Investment in Ethiopia

2019 ◽  
pp. 741-762
Author(s):  
Won L. Kidane
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
Legal Frameworks

Historically, Ethiopia’s near-perpetual independent existence has uniquely permitted latitude to shape policy and legal frameworks for the admission, protection, and management of foreign direct investment (FDI). The contemporary legal framework is a product of many external influences. International investment law principles have been part of Ethiopia’s investment law since 1903, when Ethiopia signed the Treaty of Amity and Commerce with the United States. This treaty contained some modern notions of international. Following military rule (1974–91), during which all domestic and international principles of fairness and equity were abrogated, Ethiopia attempted to build a new legal framework for the ordering of FDI. The existing framework is composed of evolving domestic legislation and an increasing number of international bilateral and regional investment treaties. This corpus of law is also equipped with institutional enforcement mechanisms. This chapter provides an overview and critique of existing rules and institutions.

scholarly journals SELF-DETERMINATION AND FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT: REIMAGINING SOVEREIGNTY IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW

2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 829-857 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Guntrip
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Host State ◽  
Continuous Evolution ◽  
State Population ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Alternative Understanding

AbstractInternational investment law can be criticized for its understanding of sovereignty. Informed by the works of Koskenniemi, this article reimagines ‘sovereignty’ based on a host State population exercising its right to economic self-determination. Recent transparency initiatives in international investment law support this conceptualization of sovereignty. Further, the stance taken aligns with the continuous evolution of the international investment law regime. The establishment of a different perspective on sovereignty in international investment law highlights the need for an alternative understanding of this term if international investment law is to achieve widespread approval.

scholarly journals Private Actors, Public Goods and Responsibility for the Right to Water in International Investment Law: An Analysis of Urbaser v. Argentina

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Edward Guntrip
Keyword(s):  
Water Supply ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Water Supply Services

International investment law balances public and private interests within the broader framework of international law. Consequently, when water supply services, which constitute a public good, are privatized and operated by foreign investors, questions arise regarding whether foreign investors could be held responsible for the right to water under international law. This article considers how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina allocated responsibility for compliance with the right to water between the host State and the foreign investor when resolving a dispute over privatized water services. It highlights how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina supports different understandings of public and private based on whether the human rights obligation is framed in terms of the duty to respect or protect. The article argues that the tribunal’s rationale overcomplicates the process of allocating responsibility for violations of the human right to water when water supply services have been privatized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document