The European Commission Proposal for an Investment Court System:

2017 ◽  
pp. 59-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Céline Lévesque
2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Dias Simões

Abstract Since 2015, the European Commission (EC) has been advocating the establishment of an investment court system (ICS). A key aspect of the proposal is the creation of the strictest ethical standards ever seen in the field of investor-state arbitration. The exercise of functions as an arbitrator does not traditionally require exclusivity, and many lawyers offer their services in the market in other capacities. This situation is described as the “double hat” phenomenon and is seen as one of the most frequent moral hazards in investment arbitration. Both the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Commission’s investment chapter proposal for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) prohibit adjudicators from acting as legal counsel in other investment dispute cases. This article discusses the potential advantages and drawbacks of the EC’s approach to the “multiple hat” problem and their potential impact on the investment arbitration system as a whole.


2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Austin ◽  
Kelly Dedel Johnson ◽  
Maria Gregoriou

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amaka Megwalu ◽  
Neophytos Loizides

Following the 1994 genocide, several justice initiatives were implemented in Rwanda, including a tribunal established by the United Nations, Rwanda's national court system and Gacaca, a ‘traditional’ community-run conflict resolution mechanism adapted to prosecute genocide perpetrators. Since their inception in 2001, the Gacaca courts have been praised for their efficiency and for widening participation, but criticised for lack of due process, trained personnel and attention to atrocities committed by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). To evaluate these criticisms, we present preliminary findings from a survey of 227 Rwandans and analyse their attitudes towards Gacaca in relation to demographic characteristics such as education, residence and loss of relatives during the genocide.


Tékhne ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-39
Author(s):  
Berit Adam

AbstractSince 2012, the European Commission has embarked on the ambitious project to harmonize public sector accounting rules on all levels of government within Europe, mainly to improve the quality as well as the comparability of financial data. Although International Public Sector Accounting Standards were deemed not to be suitable for a simple take-over because of various reasons, they nevertheless shall function as a primary reference point for developing European Public Sector Accounting Standards. A total of 21 out of 28 central governments have already reformed their accounting standards to accrual accounting, and some of them have also relied on IPSAS in this exercise. Apart from governments, various international and supranational governmental organizations have also since the end of the 2000’s been reforming their accounting system to accrual accounting, and have in the same way relied on existing IPSAS. This paper explores accounting practices found in ten intergovernmental organizations (Commonwealth Secretariat, Council of Europe, European Commission, IAEA, INTERPOL, ITER, NAPMA, OECD, International Criminal Court, WFP) whose statements are prepared in compliance with IPSAS. It analyzes how overt and covert options contained in IPSAS with relevance to the activities of intergovernmental organizations are exercised and evaluates in which areas of accounting material differences in accounting practices can be found, which may hinder the comparability of financial statements prepared on the basis of IPSAS.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document