Iranian Bilateral Investment Treaties: Substantive Principles and Standards

2013 ◽  
pp. 397-433
Author(s):  
Ardeshir Atai
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Core ◽  
Core Components ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Principles And Standards ◽  
First Time

There are more than 3000 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in force. BITs are designed to facilitate foreign direct investment (FDI) and developing countries negotiate them as a strategy to attract FDI. BITs contain common denominators of free admission, fair treatment, non-expropriation and dispute resolution procedure which are the core components of an investment friendly regime. This article makes a proposition that even if a location does not have an ideal FDI legal system in conformity with the Perry-Kessaris Paradigm, it may still be attractive for foreign investment if there are BITs containing the substantive investment protection standards. The author refers to Iran as a case study which has signed more than 50 BITs with capital exporting and neighbouring countries to promote capital flows. Iran is a resource-rich country and its economy depends on foreign exchange revenues from petroleum exports. Therefore to attract FDI flows in the energy sector it should develop a legal framework that is investor friendly. BITs contain the blueprint for reforming FDI legal system to develop an investment friendly regime. This article for the first time provides a comprehensive review of Iranian BITs.

Comprehensive or BIT by BIT: The ACIA and Indonesia's BITs

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-45
Author(s):  
Junianto James LOSARI
Keyword(s):  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Economic Community ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Investment Agreement ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Asean Economic Community

The entry into force of the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) in 2012 brought ASEAN closer towards the realization of the ASEAN Economic Community by 2015. Nonetheless, a new concern arises regarding the fate of twenty-six Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) that exist among the ASEAN governments. This may raise confusion for the ASEAN governments regarding the applicable standards of investment protection to grant investors. Indonesia was chosen as a case-study because its Investment Coordinating Board recognizes the importance of understanding Indonesia's obligations under the BITs within the context of the ACIA regime, and is in the midst of reviewing its BITs. This paper seeks to provide a better understanding of the interactions between and among these agreements to ensure that the ASEAN governments’ policies comply with their legal obligations. It also provides recommendations on how they could streamline the standards and work towards a single regime of investment protection.

scholarly journals Ending International Investment Agreements: Russia's Withdrawal from Participation in the Energy Charter Treaty

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 461-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tania Voon ◽  
Andrew D. Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Process Energy ◽  
Investment Agreements

When states withdraw from bilateral investment treaties or denounce multilateral treaties related to foreign investment, a range of intersecting questions arise in domestic and international law. Recent developments have demonstrated potential incongruities between domestic and international approaches to investment protection, including as regards the effectiveness of withdrawal and the implications for existing investments. This essay reflects on international and domestic disputes involving the withdrawal of the Russian Federation from participation in the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) to highlight these interactions. These issues have become particularly pertinent today because more than 1,500 international investment agreements (IIAs) are nearing expiry of their initial term, providing an opportunity for termination. Moreover, some states have begun to terminate or denounce investment treaties, while many more are engaging in a process of renegotiation and reform. The Russian case study also highlights the potentially far-reaching effects of a state simply signing a treaty, even many years after the state has expressed its decision to withdraw from it, and notwithstanding tensions with the domestic legal framework.

A Critical Analysis of the Protection of Investment Act 22 Of 2015

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindelwa Beaulender Mhlongo
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Current Form ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Treaties

In 2010, South Africa reviewed its foreign investment legal framework and during this process, it terminated most of its bilateral investment treaties. For a period, there was no piece of legislation that dealt with the regulation of investment in South Africa and investors had to comply with commercial laws. To solve this problem, South Africa introduced the Investment Act in 2015 aimed at regulating both domestic and foreign investment within its territory. In light of the above, the questions central to the article are whether the Investment Act in its current form balances the rights and obligations of foreign investors and that of host states. If not, what can be added or deleted from the Investment Act in order to balance these two competing rights? The article first looks at why South Africa terminated the bilateral investment treaties. It then compares the Investment Act with the SADC FIP to ascertain if the Investment Act is aligned with the sub-regional standard of foreign investment protection. Finally, recommendations are made which include suggested amendments to improve the Investment Act.

scholarly journals Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties and EU Law AfterAchmea: “Know Well What Leads You Forward and What Holds You Back”

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 981-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Csongor István Nagy
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
Alternative Theory ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Status ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
The Eu

This paper analyzes the compatibility of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties—intra-EU BITs—with EU law. The status and validity of intra-EU BITs gave rise to a heated debate in Europe, which culminated in the CJEU's recent controversial judgment inAchmea.This Article demonstrates that although the CJEU approached intra-EU BITs from the angle of federalism—where they are both redundant and illegitimate—the reality is that EU law does not provide for the kind of protection afforded by BITs. The paper gives both a positivist and a critical assessment of theAchmearuling. It argues that the judgment should be construed in the context of the underlying facts and, hence, notwithstanding the CJEU's apparently anti-arbitration attitude, its holding is rather narrow. It gives an alternative theory on intra-EU BITs' fit in the EU internal market—based on European reality—showing that the complete invalidation of intra-EU BITs is flawed because the overlap between BITs and EU law is merely partial: BITs address a subject EU law does not. This Article's central argument is that intra-EU BITs accelerate the internal market and, hence, their suppression does not lead the European integration further, but holds it back. Finally, this Article argues that the prevailing pattern of investment protection is a global scheme that cannot be arrested through regional unilateralism as essayed by the CJEU.

scholarly journals DBSCAN and GIE, Two Density-Based “Grid-Free” Methods for Finding Areas of Endemism: A Case Study of Flea Beetles (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) in the Afrotropical Region

Insects ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 1115
Author(s):  
Maurizio Biondi ◽  
Paola D’Alessandro ◽  
Walter De Simone ◽  
Mattia Iannella
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Clustering ◽  
Central Area ◽  
Kernel Density ◽  
The Core ◽  
Afrotropical Region ◽  
Areas Of Endemism ◽  
Gis Environment ◽  
First Time ◽  
Geographical Locations

Areas of endemism (AoEs) are a central area of research in biogeography. Different methods have been proposed for their identification in the literature. In this paper, a “grid-free” method based on the “Density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise” (DBSCAN) is here used for the first time to locate areas of endemism for species belonging to the beetle tribe Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Alticini in the Afrotropical Region. The DBSCAN is compared with the “Geographic Interpolation of Endemism” (GIE), another “grid-free” method based on a kernel density approach. DBSCAN and GIE both return largely overlapping results, detecting the same geographical locations for the AoEs, but with different delimitations, surfaces, and number of detected sinendemisms. The consensus maps obtained by GIE are in general less clearly delimited than the maps obtained by DBSCAN, but nevertheless allow us to evaluate the core of the AoEs more precisely, representing of the percentage levels of the overlap of the centroids. DBSCAN, on the other hand, appears to be faster and more sensitive in identifying the AoEs. To facilitate implementing the delimitation of the AoEs through the procedure proposed by us, a new tool named “CLUENDA” (specifically developed is in GIS environment) is also made available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document