Resolution of Investor-State Controversies in Developing Countries

Gantz David A.

The Law and Development Review, 2012, vol. 5, issue 2, 83-127

Abstract: The large volume of literature and commentary on resolution of investor-state disputes tends to focus primarily on the rights of the foreign investor and the process through which the investor may protect her interest through investor-state arbitration, either at the World Bank’s ICSID or in some other forum. Where issues relating to governments-as-respondents have been addressed, the emphasis has often been on nations such as the three NAFTA Parties and other relatively large and affluent nations such as Argentina. Until relatively recently, much less attention has been paid to challenges facing small developing respondents, such as the member nations of CAFTA-DR, Chile, Colombia or Ecuador. How, for example, should such governments respond to and manage claims, some of which in magnitude may represent a significant portion of the annual budget of the respondent government, when there is relatively limited in-house legal expertise and experience in such dispute resolution? Fortunately, UNCTAD and others have begun to take such challenges into account and to provide training for respondent government officials. Still, further actions are needed, including educating policy makers and the public as to the risks that arise in the investor-state dispute context and how best to address them. Changes in BITs and FTA investment provisions are also warranted. This article identifies the nature of the challenges presented to such governments and suggests practical means of dealing with them more effectively. It addresses, inter alia, coordination issues for the national administering authority; means of identifying and resolving such disputes before they reach the arbitration stage; effective use of outside legal advisers at various stages of the process; factors relating to the selection of arbitrators; administration of the arbitral process; and making current and future bilateral investment treaties more responsive to the procedural needs of respondent government. The article also draws on the history of a number of nations with experience in responding to and/or litigating investor state disputes.

Keywords: investor-state disputes; investment; law and development (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/1943-3867.1153 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:5:y:2012:i:2:p:83-127:n:3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/ldr/html

DOI: 10.1515/1943-3867.1153

Access Statistics for this article

The Law and Development Review is currently edited by Yong-Shik Lee

More articles in The Law and Development Review from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().