scholarly journals Konsep Pengelolaan Kontrak Bilateral yang Proporsional yang Menyeimbangkan Kepentingan Nasional dan Perlindungan untuk Investor Asing di Bidang Pertambangan

2020 ◽  
pp. 78-97
Author(s):  
Ricky Bima Sanjaya ◽  
Bonaventura Ivan Mollet ◽  
Nofandi Irianto
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Main Thing ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
New Jobs

Investment policy is the main thing that must prioritize the national interest, not only in the field of new jobs but also must support the domestic eco-sector. In this case the state has an obligation to defend national interests. Specifically in terms of investment by managing contracts or bilateral investment treaty agreements (BIT) based on the Proportionality Principle. This principle is intended to provide justice and certainty for the parties. Bilateral Investment Treaties (BIT) agreements are considered important for the parties, which are related to the agreement. In the Bilateral Investment Treaties Agreement (BIT) are the most preferred clauses of the Nation, the National Treatment and Fair and Equitable Treatment, and the theory of state / government intervention that is considered to be able to balance national interests and protect investors in the mining sector.

3 Fair And Equitable Treatment

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gallagher Norah ◽  
Shan Wenhua
Keyword(s):  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Standard Format ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Host State ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Full Protection

Like other bilateral investment treaties (BITs), Chinese BITs establish a set of general standards of treatment accorded to foreign investors by the host state. The most commonly found general standards of treatment include fair and equitable treatment (FET), (full) protection and security (PNS), most favoured nation treatment (MFN), and national treatment (NT). The first two belong to the group of non-contingent standards (or so-called “absolute standard of treatment”), whilst the latter two are forms of contingent standards (or “relative standards of treatment”). Absolute standards do not depend on treatment granted to other investors. In contrast, the relative standards are contingent on treatment given to other categories of investors, nationals of the host state in the case of NT and investors from third states for the MFN. This chapter begins with an examination of the FET standard, focusing on the different approaches of interpretations that have been developed in theory and in arbitration practice. It then analyzes the standard under Chinese BITs and assesses the implications of its standard format and any variations.

9 General Treatment Standards

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salacuse Jeswald W
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Treatment Standards ◽  
Degree Of Protection ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Full Protection

In order to protect foreign investments against the political risk created b by placing assets under a host country’s jurisdiction, investment treaties stipulate obligations regarding the ‘treatment’ that host countries must give to investors and their investments. This chapter discusses the absolute and relative general forms of treatment most frequently accorded to investors and investments by international investment treaties. These include fair and equitable treatment, national treatment, most-favoured-nation treatment, full protection and security, and minimum treatment according to the standards of international law. However, the degree of protection afforded individual investments may vary significantly among treaties. Consequently, persons interpreting investment treaty provisions should give careful attention to the differing ways in which individual treaty texts articulate their protections.

4 Standards of Investment Protection

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnitcha Jonathan ◽  
Skovgaard Poulsen Lauge N ◽  
Waibel Michael
Keyword(s):  
Common Core ◽  
Final Section ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Third ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment

This chapter introduces the substantive obligations in investment treaties. Most offer a common core of six substantive protections to foreign investors. The chapter first considers the two ‘relative’ standards of protection—most-favoured nation treatment and national treatment. It then turns to four ‘absolute’ standards of protection: expropriation, fair and equitable treatment, umbrella clauses, and free transfer of funds. The third section examines carve-outs that remove certain state measures from the scope of application of investment treaties, defences that can justify or excuse breaches of investment treaty protections, and the standard of review that tribunals apply when examining host state conduct. The fourth and final section discusses the calculation of compensation or damages if host states have breached investment treaties.

scholarly journals Klausula Counter-claim dalam Bilateral Investment Treaty Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 2219
Author(s):  
Nabilla Zelda Nasution
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaty ◽  
Host State ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) merupakan suatu mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa antara investor dan negara penerima investasi (host state) karena suatu pelanggaran terhadap Hukum Investasi Internasional. Berdasarkan data UNCTAD, alasan yang sering diajukan dalam gugatan ISDS umumnya meliputi empat hal permasalahan yakni Most Favoured Nations, National Treatment, Non Exproriation, dan Fair and Equitable Treatment. Namun pengaturan penyelesaian sengketa investasi dengan mekanisme ISDS dianggap lebih berpihak kepada pihak investor dibandingkan kepada host state karena sebagian besar IIA mengijinkan ISDS diajukan oleh investor, dan dalam prakteknya investor merupakan satu-satunya penggugat yang diizinkan. Ketidakseimbangan kedudukan para pihak dalam mekanisme ISDS memberikan pemikiran counter-claim sebagai upaya menyeimbangkan kedudukan investor dan host state dalam mekanisme ISDS. Selain itu pentingnya counter-claiim dalam mekanisme ISDS antara lain karena belum ada aturan yang seragam mengenai counter-claim, counter-claim memungkinkan responden untuk mencari keadilan di forum yang sama sehingga lebih efisien. Serta bagi host state, counter-claim dapat digunakan untuk membersihkan reputasi host state atas gugatan yang diajukan oleh investor. Penelitian ini mengkaji klausula counterclaim yang dapat diadopsi dalam BIT Indonesia sehingga dapat menyeimbangkan kedudukan para pihak dalam mekanisme ISDS, khususnya Indonesia sebagai host state. Penelitian hukum yang digunakan adalah pendekatan konseptual (conseptual approach), pendekatan perundang-udangan (statute approach), dan pendekatan kasus (case approach) dalam membahas counterclaim dalam mekanisme ISDS serta dalam menganalisa rumusan klausula counterclaim yang dapat di adopsi dalam Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) Indonesia.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Kepentingan Nasional Melalui Klausula Dalam Bilateral Investment Treaty

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 1909
Author(s):  
Adinda Balqis Tegarmas G.
Keyword(s):  
Host Country ◽  
Dependency Theory ◽  
Policy Space ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Kepentingan nasional merupakan hal yang abstrak dan dinamis namun dianggap penting dalam pelaksanaan kegiatan penanaman modal. Landasan yang mendasari argumentasi tersebut yaitu parameter dan definisi yang beragam atau tidak menentu. Setiap negara berusaha melindungi dan mempertahankan kepentingan nasional dalam hal penanaman modal asing sehingga dapat memacu pembangunan perekonomian nasional, khususnya pada bilateral investment treaty (BIT). BIT menjadi instrumen perlindungan kepentingan nasional yang menjamin kepastian hukum dan membatasi intrepretasi hakim pada suatu sengketa. Kepentingan nasional dapat ditemukan dalam klasula utama BIT yaitu Most Favored Nation, National Treatment, Fair and Equitable Treatment. Tiga klausula tersebut dinilai belum memberikan perlindungan yang seimbang antara investor asing dan investor dalam negeri, berakibat buruk pada kepentingan nasional host country dan membatasi regulatory space atau policy space suatu negara untuk mengatur sendiri kegiatan penanaman modal. Hal tersebut bersesuaian dengan dependency theory yang memandang penanaman modal asing sebagai suatu ancaman bagi host country. Sejalan dengan hal tersebut, BIT dapat diberhentikan berdasarkan fundamental changes of circumtances secara legal apabila tidak melakukan tindakan breach of treaty dan dapat digantikan dengan model BIT yang baru. Tulisan ini mengkaji bentuk perlindungan kepentingan nasional dalam penanaman modal asing dan pilihan penyesuaian klasula utama BIT sehingga dapat memberikan perlindungan terhadap kepentingan nasional.

9 General Treatment Standards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salacuse Jeswald W
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
General Treatment ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Treatment Standards ◽  
Strong Similarity ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Full Protection

This chapter addresses the general standards of treatment in investment treaties. General treatment standards consist of two types: (a) absolute standards, which are not contingent upon specified factors, happenings, or government behaviour towards other investors or persons; and (b) relative standards, which are dependent upon the host government's treatment of other investments or investors. The chapter discusses the absolute and relative general treatment standards used most frequently in international investment treaties. These include full protection and security, fair and equitable treatment, minimum treatment according to international law, most-favoured-nation treatment, and national treatment. That these standards exist in one form or another in most investment treaties gives the treaties a strong similarity. It must also be acknowledged, however, that not all treaties include all of these general standards and that significant differences exist in the way individual treaties articulate them.

Investment Law before Arbitration

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 929-947
Author(s):  
Jarrod Hepburn ◽  
Martins Paparinskis ◽  
Lauge N Skovgaard Poulsen ◽  
Michael Waibel
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Shareholder Protection ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Treaty Shopping ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
The Cold War

ABSTRACT Investment law was not always about investor–state arbitration. Based on British and German archival materials from the Cold War, this paper shows how aims and priorities in the investment treaty regime changed over time. We find important differences in the role and relative importance of different legal rules then and now. Most notably, national treatment and free transfer clauses were key in early investment law, whereas fair and equitable treatment was regarded as relatively unimportant. At the same time, early drafters did anticipate some of the most contentious issues in modern investment law, including treaty shopping, shareholder protection, and the ‘no greater rights’ proviso.

Ensuring Reasonableness in the Conduct of Host States

2019 ◽  
pp. 101-174
Author(s):  
Federico Ortino
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Investments ◽  
Host State ◽  
Police Powers ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Full Protection

The aim of the chapter is twofold. First, it investigates the extent to which investment treaties include a guarantee of ‘substantive reasonableness’ as one of the key protections granted to foreign investments. Second, it attempts to identify the standard of review that have been employed by investment tribunals in assessing the lawfulness of host States’ conduct. The analysis focuses on the following treaty provisions: (a) full protection and security; (b) non-impairment through arbitrary or unjustifiable measures; and (iii) fair and equitable treatment. This chapter also examines the application by investment tribunals of the ‘police powers’ doctrine in defining an indirect expropriation. One key finding stems from the present analysis. While investment treaty tribunals have (at least for the most part) applied these open-ended standards as reasonableness-based provisions, tribunals have crucially differed with regard to the specific reasonableness test employed in order to review the lawfulness of the host State conduct.

Fair and Equitable Treatment in Saudi Bilateral Investment Treaties

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-204
Author(s):  
Sarah Alshahrani
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Police Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
Host State ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Abstract Fair and equitable treatment (FET) is one of the general principles included in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and it is as important as the expropriation clause. Recent investment tribunal practice has shown that FET is one of the most frequently invoked provisions. All Saudi BITs include an old version of the FET clause. However, the vagueness and ambiguity of FET can hold the country liable when it enacts measures in the public interest, and, therefore, a thorough analysis of the best formulation of FET is necessary in order to achieve predictability and certainty for both the investor and the host state, in addition to the need to widen the police power of host states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document