scholarly journals Sustainability Impact Assessments as Inputs and as Interpretative Aids in International Investment Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Gehring ◽  
Sean Stephenson ◽  
Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Directorate General ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
Social Environmental ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
Trade And Investment

Sustainability impact assessments (SIAs) act as bridges between trade and investment agreements and social, environmental and human considerations. They are relevant as inputs into the treaty negotiation process and as interpretive aids in investment treaty arbitration. As inputs, SIAs attempt to measure the impact of environmental, social, economic and human rights aspects of trade and investment agreements prior to and during a treaty’s negotiation. SIAs have been performed on all major negotiations in the EU since 1999, and will continue to be performed under its investment competence. Case studies in this article demonstrate how SIAs may include climate change. Additionally, legal recommendations are offered which, if adopted by the Directorate General for Trade, should increase the effectiveness of SIAs. As interpretive aids, SIAs may be key references in treaty interpretation arguments in light of increased environment and development related investment disputes and focus on sustainable development policy space.

scholarly journals The ISDS Mechanism and Standards of Protection in the Investment Treaty

Lentera Hukum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Pandu Rizky Putra Pratama ◽  
Prita Amalia
Keyword(s):  
Host Country ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Agreement ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Investment Agreements

International investment activities require legal certainty for investors. While the host country also needs legal certainty related to state sovereignty, legal protection is needed for investors and the host country to realize legal certainty in investment activities. Countries in the world entered into investment agreements to provide legal protection for investment activities. In investment agreements, generally, there are requirements to comply with the national law of the host country to get protection from investment agreements. This study aims to review the implications of not fulfilling the obligations in the investment agreement to apply the benefits contained therein, specifically regarding ISDS mechanism and protection standards. This study finds that the impact of the non-fulfillment of these obligations on the ISDS mechanism depends on the admission clause specified in the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). On standards of protection, it refers to general principles of international law and arbitration decisions, investments that violate these obligations do not receive international legal protection. This research suggests the Indonesian Government tighten the admission clause in the BIT to prevent investors from using the ISDS mechanism in the BIT and to specify the impact of violating obligations to comply with the national laws of the host country. KEYWORDS: International Investment Law, Standards of Protection, Bilateral Investment Treaty

HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW: THE 2016 MOROCCO–NIGERIA BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. 761-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niccolò Zugliani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Investment ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Socially Responsible ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Fertile Ground ◽  
Investment Agreements

AbstractThe 2016 Morocco–Nigeria bilateral investment treaty (BIT) stands out from other such treaties because of its innovative human rights approach to the protection and promotion of foreign direct investment. Human rights permeate its approach to the regulation of investment in a manner which is most unusual in international investment agreements (IIAs). As a result, this is the most socially-responsible BIT currently concluded. Although it remains exceptional within the investment-treaty framework, the treaty reflects African initiatives to ensure that the next generation of BITs encourages more responsible investments. As such, it shows that human rights-compliant investment treaties can find fertile ground in developing African countries and it sets an example for current and future negotiations aimed at fostering respect for human rights in investment activities.

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.

An Overview of Sri Lanka’s Bilateral Investment Treaties: Status Quo and Some Insights into Future Modifications

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-318
Author(s):  
Dilini PATHIRANA
Keyword(s):  
Sri Lanka ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Global Context ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

AbstractSri Lanka is the first country against which a foreign investor has had recourse to international arbitration based on the dispute settlement clause in a bilateral investment treaty (BIT). This was the case of AAPL v. Sri Lanka. Since then, the country has been challenged twice before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), while its latest encounter was in the case of Deutsche Bank AG v. Sri Lanka. In the intervening years between these two cases, Sri Lanka maintained silence and failed to alter its BITs in a global context where the conventional attitude on international investment agreements (IIAs) is being increasingly reconsidered. This paper provides an overview of Sri Lanka’s BITs, which highlights the urgency of reconsidering the country’s investment treaty-making practice. It suggests some modifications to align the country’s investment treaty-making practice with international investment law (IIL) developments.

scholarly journals International Investment Arbitration in Laos: Large Issues for a Small State

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 1001-1024
Author(s):  
Romesh Weeramantry ◽  
Mahdev Mohan
Keyword(s):  
East Asian ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Small State ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements

Abstract Laos is no stranger to international investment arbitration. Despite its status as one of Southeast Asia’s least developed countries, it has had an Investment Law for more than two decades and is also a party to several bilateral and Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)-related investment agreements. More recently, two investment treaty claims have been made against it, one of which has given rise to an award challenge that went all the way to Singapore’s highest court. This article will examine the history, evolution and current iteration of Laos’ relationship with international investment law and focus on the two investment treaty claims instituted against Laos. The article concludes with an appraisal of Laos’ need to maintain its investment treaty programme, despite the difficulties that may have arisen as a result of it being a respondent in investment treaty arbitrations.

Illegal Investments in Investment Treaty Arbitration

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 281-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan W. Schill
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Foreign Investor ◽  
Considerable Potential ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Abstract Investment treaty tribunals on numerous occasions have had to deal with the impact of breaches of domestic law by a foreign investor on the investment’s protection under an international investment treaty. In this context, tribunals had to interpret different “in accordance with host State law”-clauses contained in investment treaties, but also dealt with the effect of illegality in the absence of such clauses. The present article traces this increasingly complex jurisprudence and frames it as an issue of the relationship between domestic law and international investment law. Although different approaches exist, most importantly as to the effect of domestic illegality on the jurisdiction of investment treaty tribunals, the article suggests that there is considerable potential for convergence in arbitral jurisprudence, thus unveiling the contours of a doctrinal structure for dealing with illegal investments in international investment law and arbitration.

Principles of Non-Discrimination after US – Clove Cigarettes, US – Tuna II, US – COOL and EC – Seal Products and their Implications for International Investment Law

2015 ◽  
pp. 141-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benn McGrady
Keyword(s):  
Trade Agreements ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
General Exceptions ◽  
Detrimental Impact ◽  
Gatt 1994

Recent disputes have clarified principles of non-discrimination under WTO law. US – Clove Cigarettes clarifies that under the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, a regulation modifying conditions of competition to the detriment of imported products will not be discriminatory if that detrimental impact stems exclusively from a legitimate regulatory distinction. This test was applied in US – Tuna II and US – COOL, which begin to clarify how to judge whether a regulation is based exclusively on a legitimate regulatory distinction. EC – Seal Products clarifies that in the context of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, whether a measure is legitimate in regulatory terms is to be adjudged solely under the general exceptions and not provisions governing non-discrimination. Although generalizing about the implications of WTO disputes for investment treaty interpretation is perilous, these disputes raise new questions, particularly for interpretation of investment chapters in trade agreements.

Implications of international trade and investment agreements on policy space for restricting marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children: Lessons from inter-disciplinary expert interviews

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-41
Author(s):  
Kelly Garton ◽  
Boyd Swinburn ◽  
Anne Marie Thow
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Unhealthy Food ◽  
Policy Space ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Food And Beverages ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
Trade And Investment

Abstract Objective: To determine the implications of international trade and investment agreements (TIAs) for national governments’ policy space to restrict the marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children. Design: In-depth interviews based on a series of policy scenario ‘vignettes,’ guided by an adapted scenario analysis methodology. Setting: Global Participants: Nine key informants from relevant sectors, with expertise regarding the intersection of public health nutrition policy, international trade law, and international investment law. Results: Participants consistently identified the relevance of several principles, common to many TIAs: non-discrimination, necessity and justification, market access requirements and quantitative restrictions, intellectual property rights and trademark protections, and fair and equitable treatment of investors. Two main policy design factors that interact heavily with TIA-related policy space were the framing of objectives, and regulatory distinctions drawn. Contextual factors may shape the analysis of TIA-related policy space on a case-by-case basis, while the relative power of the actors and institutions involved in both domestic and international policy spheres may influence whether and how such legal constraints to policy space are activated. Conclusions: Regulatory marketing restrictions run the risk of incurring challenges under World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements and other free trade and investment agreements. However, concerned policy makers should be aware of the difference between theoretical risk, threat of a challenge, and realistic initiation and/or loss of a formal dispute. Our findings indicate that there is policy space to adopt significant marketing restrictions, though an understanding of these legal risks, and strategic policy design, are important.

ADJUDGING THE EXCEPTIONAL AT INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW: SECURITY, PUBLIC ORDER AND FINANCIAL CRISIS

2010 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Kurtz
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crisis ◽  
International Law ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Public Order ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis article examines the impact of international law on the ability of States to mitigate the effects of financial crises. It focuses on the invocation of investment treaty disciplines in the aftermath of the 2001–2002 Argentine financial crisis, and the adjudication of Argentina's defence of a state of necessity under both subject treaties and at customary international law. The article uncovers three interpretative methods in the jurisprudence on the relationship between the treaty exception and customary plea of necessity: methodologies I (confluence), II (lex specialis) and III (primary-secondary applications). Method I is the dominant approach in the jurisprudence and the most restrictive of the three readings. The article argues that method I is mistaken both on a careful interpretation of the two legal standards and on a broader historical analysis of the emergence of investment treaty norms. Given these substantive flaws, the article isolates the motivations to account for the popularity of this method through a close reading of the awards. These reveal continuing tensions in the field, not least the problematic suggestion that a single value of protection should exclusively inform our understanding of the purpose of investment treaties. These sociological features of investor–State arbitration should, it is suggested, inform our choice on other interpretative methods. This comes down to an election between methods II (lex specialis) and III (primary–secondary applications). Method III is the most convincing and coherent reading of the relationship between the two legal standards. The article concludes by offering a framework to address the key interpretative questions implicated in that method: (a) the identification and scope of the notion of ‘public order’ and a State's ‘essential security interests’; and (b) the appropriate test of ‘necessity’ or means–end scrutiny.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document