Transplantation, Legal Adoption, Harmonization of OMNIBUS LAW and Investment Law

The best way in an effort to manage investment is by transplanting, adopting laws, harmonization by making breakthroughs to existing regulations, such as in the case of implementing the Job Creation Law. The Omnibus Law offered by the government as a “practical and pragmatic” solution is a political and legal policy to cut various regulatory barriers, to simplify bureaucracy, to accelerate services, to increase efficiency, to increase competitiveness, and to prevent opportunities for corrupt behavior. The government must evaluate this law (Job Creation) where there is still overlap without regard to regulations. The statement of the problem in this scientific paper is why there is a conflict of interest and regulations that are not in accordance with the laws and regulations? As normative juridical research, this research is based on an analysis of legal norms. The Omnibus Law is a political product. In the process of its discussion, the law resulted from a political process. The government must evaluate this law (Job Creation) where in the process of making it there is still overlap without regard to regulations.

IMPLEMENTATION OF CSR IN BENGKULU AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE BENGKULU GOVERNOR'S DECREE NUMBER: P.127.DINSOS. OF 2018 CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CSR FORUM OF BENGKULU PROVINCE

CSR is an element in improving people's welfare. Through the establishment of a CSR Forum which was established based on the Bengkulu Governor's Decree Number: P.127.Dinsos. In 2018 concerning the Establishment of the Bengkulu Province CSR Forum, the Regional Government seeks to increase the participation of every company in Bengkulu. However, the results have not been effective, this is because the formation of this forum was not accompanied by the authority and mechanism in the form of a Governor Regulation. Theimpact is that CSR implementation in Bengkulu Province is small and not focused. The problem in this research is how the implementation of CSR after the issuance of the Bengkulu Governor's Decree Number: P.127.Dinsos. 2018 concerning the Establishment of the Bengkulu Province CSR Forum and What Are the Obstacles in the implementation of the CSR forum. This type of research is empirical, data sources obtained from interviews, documents, as well as literature and legislation relevant to the research. The result of thisresearch is the finding of a 16% percentage of the participation rate of companies in Bengkulu, from a total of 196 companies in Bengkulu, only 33 companies registered by the CSR Forum have distributed CSR. The rest of this company never reported the distribution of CSR. This is very inconsistent with the Utilities Theory because large companies in Bengkulu Province have not contributed too much to the Environment and Society, and are still focused on Company Profits only. Furthermore, in the second discussion it was also conveyed that several obstacles were experienced by the CSR Forum, among others: The government has not yet embraced the forum in relation to companies, There is no Regulation on Implementation Mechanism in the Investment Law and the TDP Law, the Report Submission Mechanism is not Clearly, the absence of basic technical rules for implementing CSR reporting, absence of punishments and sanctions from the local government to companies for distributing CSR.

Investor Due Diligence and Legitimate Expectations

This article examines the significance of investor due diligence in the context of a claim that a host State has breached its obligation to provide fair and equitable treatment (FET). Despite increasing reliance on due diligence exercises, there are considerable differences in how tribunals understand and use such exercises. These differences are related to different visions of the function and future of international investment law. After exploring the different approaches that are taken, this article will argue that the most coherent approach is to treat investor due diligence as merely a technique for assessing investor reasonableness and prudence, rather than a strict requirement.

Harmonizing Commercial and Investment Arbitration: Conflict Dynamics

This article provides an independent analysis of the scope and extent of arbitration under investment agreements, and the implications of the possible convergence in the process of harmonization of international commercial arbitration law.The successful settlement of any dispute depends on the compatibility of the nature of the dispute with the technique to which it is submitted for resolution. In the last decade, there was a constant increase in the number of disputes that were subjected to arbitration and a major chunk of those disputes covered a comparatively new but known area called international investment law. With economic globalization allowing the free flow of foreign direct investment (FDI) in and out of a country, the existing regulatory framework in international law to standardize investment liberalization is often seen as ineffective, hence the consequent disputes. Here, arbitration offers a suitable framework for the amicable settlement of commercial disputes covering investment agreements with the assistance of bilateral or multilateral agreements between the states. Preferential trade agreements pertaining to investment often contain an arbitration clause for the settlement of future disputes between parties. At this juncture, one may find that there exists a fundamental dilemma in ascertaining the true nature of investment arbitration and how it is different from commercial arbitration. For example, the protection being offered to human rights under the purview of investment arbitration may generate doubts in the minds of investment arbitrators. In commercial arbitration, divergences in a pluralistic order become particularly relevant whereas the diverse legal cultures supported by individual constitutional frameworks have a direct impact on investment arbitration due to their practical application. The article also discusses the need for harmonized rules governing arbitration procedures while maintaining the functional dissimilarities between commercial and investment arbitration.

Holding Transnational Corporations Accountable for Environmental Harm Through Counterclaims in Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Myth or Reality?

Considering the imperative need to protect our environment, the present article begins by highlighting the absence of a comprehensive international framework under which transnational corporations may be held accountable for environmental harm. Drawing from the successful decisions on environmental counterclaims in Perenco v Ecuador and Burlington Resources v Ecuador, this article thus argues that this legal void could be filled by holding transnational corporations accountable for environmental harm under international investment law. However, the practice of environmental counterclaims as they have materialised in these recent decisions emphasises the existence of a gap between theory and reality and, thus, their limited chances of success. It is nevertheless suggested that, in the context of current debates surrounding an investor-State dispute settlement reform, States hold the cards to ensure that transnational corporations are held accountable for environmental harm under international investment law.