scholarly journals The Role of Democratic Governance and Indirect Expropriation in International Investment Treaty Violations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Ziegler ◽  
David Carlson
Keyword(s):  
Public Support ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Investment Agreements

Democracies are thought to violate treaties less frequently than non-democracies, yet democracies violate bilateral investment treaties (BITs) just as often as non-democracies. Though democratic governments may intend to meet their international obligations, and though democratic institutions provide greater political constraints to encourage compliance, investment agreements may conflict with the goal of maintaining domestic public support. Specifically, we argue that credible elections create strong incentives for governments to side with domestic voters over foreign business interests, and to pass legislation that violates investment agreements. We use a data set of BIT violation complaints that better captures potential indirect expropriation to confirm prior findings that show a difference in violations by regime type. Since policies are not passed immediately and companies do not file arbitration complaints instantly when a potential violation occurs, democratic governments are only more likely to be sued as their time in office increases. The results suggest that the ability of voters to sanction leaders is an important mechanism that incentivizes governments to pass legislation that potentially violates investment treaties through indirect expropriation.

scholarly journals Constitutionality of the Colombia-France Bilateral Investment Treaty

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-478
Author(s):  
Rafael Tamayo-Álvarez
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Adverse Impacts ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
The Government ◽  
Benefits And Costs ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
Practical Implications

In a judgment issued on June 6, 2019 (Judgment), the Colombian Constitutional Court (Court) examined the constitutionality of the Agreement for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments between Colombia and France (Agreement). The Court upheld the constitutionality of the Agreement on the condition that the government adopt a joint interpretative statement with France to clarify some of its provisions and prevent interpretations contrary to the Colombian constitutional order. In doing so, the Court articulated a standard of review that takes into account the benefits and costs of international investment agreements (IIAs), the application of which entailed an insightful examination of the Agreement in light of the decisions of investment tribunals. The judgment raises significant issues of public international law, including the practical implications of conditioning ratification of the Agreement on adoption of a joint interpretative statement and the role of such statements in the interpretation of IIAs. Furthermore, the judgment makes important contributions to the ongoing process of reform of the investment treaty regime and the strategies adopted by states to counter the adverse impacts of IIAs on regulatory autonomy.

Part II Guide to Key Preliminary and Procedural Issues, 6 Aspects of Procedure for Institution of Proceedings and Establishment of Tribunals in Investment Treaty Arbitration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kostadinova Milanka
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Chamber Of Commerce ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
International Chamber Of Commerce ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

The institution of treaty-based proceedings in a particular forum or under particular set of arbitration rules depends on the consent provisions of the underlying investment treaty. Some 767 arbitration cases have been initiated so far under the total of 3,324 bilateral investment treaties and other international investment agreements signed to date. This chapter provides an overview of the technical and fairly complex procedures for initiating proceedings and constituting tribunals in investment treaty arbitration. It examines the prevalent practices from the perspective of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute (ICSID) Convention and Rules, and other leading sets of international arbitration rules such as the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules, the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, and the Arbitration Rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, which are among the non-ICSID Rules more commonly referenced in investment treaties.

Chinese Investment Treaties

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gallagher Norah ◽  
Shan Wenhua
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Foreign Economic Policy ◽  
Continuous Growth ◽  
Chinese Investment ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Dramatic Rise ◽  
Investment Treaties

China's success in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) in the last decade is undisputed and unprecedented. It is currently the second largest FDI recipient in the world, a success partially due to China's efforts to enter into bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and other international investment instruments. This book is a comprehensive commentary on Chinese BITs. Chinese investment treaties have typically provided international forums for settling investment disputes such as the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Given the continuous growth of FDI in China, the emergence of state-investor disagreements in China, and the dramatic rise of investment treaty based arbitrations world wide in recent years, it is anticipated that there will be an increasing number of investment arbitrations involving the central and local governments of China. This book reviews and analyzes China's approach to foreign investment. It considers the current role of investment treaties in China's foreign economic policy, analyzes and interprets the key provisions of the BITs, and discusses the future agenda of China's investment program. It looks at how this investment regime interconnects with the domestic system and considers the implications for a foreign investor in China.

scholarly journals Putting the MFN Genie Back in the Bottle

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 60-63
Author(s):  
Michael Waibel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
Trade Regime ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Limited Role ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Text Context

This essay underscores the importance of background understandings in general international law for interpreting brief, open-ended clauses such as most favored nation (MFN) clauses. Contrary to Simon Batifort and J. Benton Heath's claim, I suggest that often interpreters of MFN clauses cannot limit themselves to the text, context, and preparatory materials of a specific MFN clause. A common international negotiating technique, including for investment treaties, is to rely on the general background understanding of what a clause typically means in international law—its default meaning. I also argue that MFN clauses have played a surprisingly limited role in the international investment regime to date. In the main, they have functioned as a stepping stone for procedural and substantive guarantees found in third-party investment treaties. This use, and the limited role of MFN clauses in investment treaty awards, stands in sharp contrast to MFN clauses in the trade regime.

The Republic of Ghana and Bilateral Investment Treaties: A Burgeoning Expert?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gracious Avayiwoe
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Pan African ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Investment Agreements

Abstract In this note, I categorize and review the bilateral investment treaties (BITs) concluded by the Republic of Ghana. I identify the current status of Ghana in the BIT sphere as being that of neither a novice nor a fully-fledged expert. The country is, nevertheless, progressively exhibiting some level of innovation and negotiation influence. Notwithstanding, all generations of its BITs remain very broad in scope, and, also, share laconic and vaguely-worded provisions. Furthermore, contemporary models of international investment agreements (IIAs) as contained in Ghana’s latest BIT—the earlier generations having lacked such innovations—is not as robust as those in emerging IIAs of Africa. Towards sustainability and systemic coherence of the BITs and the new African IIA paradigm, Ghana, certainly, needs to reform its existing BITs and reorient its future investment treaty practice. In the interim, I propose the Pan-African Investment Code (PAIC) as the benchmark.

International Investment Agreements, 2015–2016

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Coleman Jesse ◽  
Johnson Lise ◽  
Sachs Lisa ◽  
Gupta Kanika
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
The Right ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

This chapter considers developments in 2015 and 2016 that illustrate trends and features in recent treaty drafting. It first discusses the expanded awareness of, and interest in, the investment regime that has emerged in recent years, followed by the role of ratification in the context of investment treaty drafting and policy. It then discusses four drafting trends: (1) constraining investor access to dispute settlement and limiting arbitral discretion; (2) better protecting the right to regulate; (3) establishing investor obligations; and (4) introducing codes of conduct for decision makers in investment disputes. Finally, the chapter provides a brief overview of new provisions regarding the conduct and qualifications of arbitrators, including a glimpse at the EU proposal for a multilateral court.

6 The Interpretation of Investment Treaties

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salacuse Jeswald W
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
International Investment Agreements ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Agreements

This chapter discusses the interpretation of investment treaties. Treaty interpretation is never easy, but the task of interpreting investment treaties is rendered particularly difficult by two factors: first, the generality and vagueness of many of the terms used in their texts, such as ‘fair and equitable treatment’, ‘full protection and security’, and ‘expropriation and measures tantamount to expropriation’ which reasonable persons may interpret differently. Although investment treaties have not traditionally defined these terms, some of the more recent international investment agreements, perhaps influenced by disputed arbitral decisions, have sought to provide more or less detailed definitional provisions for the often-contested important terms they employ. The second interpretational difficulty arises from the factual and legal complexity of the investment transactions and relationships to which investment treaties are applied. As a result of these complexities, arbitral tribunals and lawyers must devote significant effort and time to give meaning to words that at first glance appear simple but usually are not. The chapter then provides guidance on treaty interpretation. The basic rules of investment treaty interpretation are found in Articles 31, 32, and 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT).

Hesitant Embrace: China’s Recent Approach to International Investment Rule-Making

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 843-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Berger
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Investment Policy ◽  
Recent Period ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Recent Approach ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Rule Making

China is becoming one of the key stakeholders in the international investment regime. It is, however, still unclear what role China can play in the ongoing reform of the international investment regime. Starting from this overall focus, this article analyses the most recent period of China’s international investment policy-making. Mapping the contents of investment treaties signed since 2008 it argues that China undertook a partial ‘NAFTA-ization’. Whilst China has adopted a number of clauses invented by the NAFTA countries, it introduced these clauses in an incoherent fashion. Looking at the drivers of this peculiar policy, this article argues that China’s investment treaty-making practice is largely inspired by its partner countries. As a result of this particular negotiation policy, Beijing’s approach to international investment rule-making is inconsistent. This belies the argument that China can make a significant contribution to reforming the international investment regime.

scholarly journals RECALIBRATING THE INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT REGIME THROUGH NARROWED JURISDICTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-334
Author(s):  
Javier García Olmedo
Keyword(s):  
International Investment ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Planning Approach ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Investor Protections ◽  
Legitimacy Crisis ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction ◽  
Dutch Model

AbstractThe legitimacy crisis confronting the international investment regime has called for reforms to eliminate the asymmetric and troubled nature of investment treaties. These instruments grant extensive investor protections without offering reciprocal safeguards for host States wishing to preserve regulatory space. This article argues that any reform designed to redress imbalances in the existing regime should first aim at narrowing the personal jurisdiction of investment tribunals. Problematically, access to most investment treaties depends on broad nationality requirements, which have enabled investors to use corporations or passports of convenience to obtain treaty protection. This practice exacerbates the unbalanced relationship between host States and investors. It increases host States’ exposure to investment treaty claims and allows investors to circumvent newer, more State-oriented investment treaties. Using as an example the novel anti-nationality planning approach embraced in the 2019 Dutch Model BIT, this article suggests effective treaty mechanisms that States can adopt to restrict the range of investors that are entitled to claim.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document