Where the Shadow Falls: Corruption in International Investment Arbitration

2016 ◽  
pp. 489-501
Author(s):  
Cameron A. Miles
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Review Essay ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Community ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Company Limited

The international community has long been aware of the intersection between domestic corruption and foreign direct investment. As such, corruption is not infrequently (but at the same time, not frequently) a presence in international investment arbitration. Save in rare circumstances (see e.g. World Duty Free Company Limited v Republic of Kenya and Metal-Tech Ltd v Uzbekistan) it is not raised overtly – but instead exercises a tenebrous influence on proceedings that is difficult to quantify precisely. This article is a review essay of the first systematic attempt to chart this influence across every investment arbitration case in which corruption issues have been relevant, Aloysius P. Llamzon’s Corruption in International Investment Arbitration.

scholarly journals Chinese Foreign Direct Investment and Human Rights in Kenya: A Mutually-Affirming Relationship?

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-154
Author(s):  
Rosemary Mwanza
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Reciprocal Relationship ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Chinese Foreign Direct Investment

Does the increase in Chinese foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into Kenya portend doom for human rights in the country? The prominent narrative has been that FDI undermines human rights in host states, especially those in the developing world. This narrative is countered by claims that there exists a mutually affirming relationship between FDI and human rights. Proponents of this view posit that FDI facilitates the diffusion of human rights norms and correlates with the improved rule of law in host states. They also point to emerging human rights jurisprudence in international investment arbitration as evidence of a reciprocal relationship between FDI and human rights. In light of these arguments, this paper analyses the extent to which such a reciprocal relationship bears out between Chinese FDI and human rights in Kenya. It will be demonstrated that given the lack of a framework for human rights accountability for corporations at the international level, the restrictive treatment of human rights in international investment arbitration tribunals and weak institutional capacity in host states, a positive overlap between FDI and human rights is hardly a panacea for human rights protection in Kenya. Therefore, a synergy of legal measures and non-legal measures provide a pragmatic approach to insulate human rights from violations that may be associated with Chinese FDIs.

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.

PROTECTING ITALIAN INVESTMENTS IN LIBYA’S CHANGING ENVIRONMENT

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferdinando Franceschelli
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Trading Partner ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Extensive Damage

Italy is both the main trading partner and the State that has the most sizeable foreign direct investment interests in Libya. However, the outbreak of armed conflict in Libya in 2011 resulted in extensive damage to Italian investors. In order to obtain proper redress Italian investors may seek to rely upon investment protection provisions contained in treaties previously concluded between these two States, notably the BIT of 2000 and the Treaty of Benghazi of 2008. Crucially, however, the outbreak of the armed conflict and the subsequent regime change that took place following the Gaddafi’s removal from power raise doubts about the effectiveness of such treaties. This article firstly reviews both the relevant rules of international law and the investment treaties in force between Italy and Libya. Then, it examines the relationship between Italy and Libya during and after the events of 2011 and comes to the conclusion that such treaties are still effective and as such Italian investors may invoke the provisions contained therein, including those envisaging resort to international investment arbitration.

International Investment Arbitration in Thailand: Limiting Contract-Based Claims While Maintaining Treaty-Based ISDS

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 793-835
Author(s):  
Luke Nottage ◽  
Sakda Thanitcul
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Bounded Rationality ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Host State ◽  
Investment Arbitration

Abstract Thailand was initially cautious with its bilateral investment treaties (BITs), consistently eschewing investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). From 1989 it began agreeing to ISDS, but only if both states were party to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, which Thailand signed in 1965 but never ratified. From 1993, BITs increasingly provided for ad hoc arbitration. Major disputes emerged from the 1990s instead under contracts with foreign investors containing arbitration clauses. From 2004 concession contracts required Cabinet pre-approval. This limitation was extended to all public contracts from 2009, after the first treaty-based ISDS award against Thailand, although two further claims have been filed recently. A 2002 Model bit was revised in 2013 to incorporate more pro-host-state provisions, but Thailand had net foreign direct investment (FDI) outflows in 2011 and still concludes treaties with ISDS. These patterns suggest ‘more than bounded’ rationality.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF GLOBAL INVESTMENT POLICY: MODERN TRENDS AND PROSPECTS

2019 ◽  
pp. 142-148
Author(s):  
Larisa Germanovna Chuvakhina
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
World Economy ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Investment Policy ◽  
Investment Promotion ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World

The article highlights the current problems of investments in the development of the world economy, when international investment needs are significantly high. The priority is given to the issues of investment resources for achieving the goals of sustainable development of the world economy. It has been stated that for creating the effective economic policy, the countries need to attract foreign investment. The current trends in the development of global market for foreign direct investment flows are examined. The flows of global foreign direct investment in 2017-2018 are analyzed. Special attention is given to the study of the US investment policy. The reduction in US investments into the Russian economy in terms of the sanctions policy against Russia is marked. The changes in the investment policy of the administration of D. Trump in terms of strengthening American protectionism are underlined. The issues of US-EU investment cooperation are considered. The role of the US Federal Reserve in regulating the activities of foreign companies in the US market is defined. The main decisions taken at the X World Investment Forum of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in October, 2018 are considered. The role of investment promotion agencies is defined as one of the tools to attract foreign investments into the country's economy. The decrease in the level of international investment and increased competition between countries for attracting foreign investment is stated. The study confirms that the investment attractiveness of the country, stability of the national financial system, and legal security of business play a decisive role in attracting foreign direct investment.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document