Reformed ISDS

The investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism has come under fire in the past few years. As a result of many controversial cases, civil society groups, international organisations, academics, lawyers and state officials have argued that the arbitration process has had a negative impact on public interest and is need of reform or should be scrapped altogether.

Therefore tweaked versions of the system have been proposed to avoid the most undesired “side effects” of standard ISDS rules. At least 45 countries and four regional blocs are revising or have recently revised their investment model agreements.

In 2012, South Africa, the government started to withdraw from its bilateral investment treaties and amended domestic legislation to make it compatible with BIT-like investor protections while incorporating exceptions where warranted by public interest considerations.

In 2014, Indonesia decided to terminate 67 bilateral investment treaties and has also been developing a new model BIT that supposedly reflects a more balanced approach between the country’s right to regulate and foreigner investor protection.

In 2015, the European Commission established a new ’Investment Court System’ to replace the current ISDS mechanism in its trade deals. The ICS has been incorporated in the EU deals with Canada (CETA) and Vietnam. It has also been proposed for the ongoing negotiations with Mexico, the Philippines and the US (TTIP). However many critics claim that this new system is largely window-dressing.

In December 2015, India released a revised model BIT which, for instance, requires investors to exhaust domestic remedies (Indian courts) before turning to international arbitration and leaves out “fair and equitable treatment” provisions.

In 2016, members of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) (Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland) amended the SADC Finance and Investment Protocol that included ISDS provisions. The amendments eliminate the ISDS mechanism (only state-to-state arbitration remains) and narrow the scope of investors’ rights, including exclusion of “fair and equitable treatment”, limitations to “national treatment” to allow for local preferences, obligation for investors to follow host state domestic law and exception from investment rules for policies enacted to comply with international treaties.

In South America, experts from the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) have been developing an investment settlement centre, as an alternative to the World Bank’s ICSID.

In 2017 states from around the world began to debate at UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) about the possible reform of the ISDS system in a way that would address legitimacy concerns and rebalance the system. As part of these discussions, the EU proposed the creation of a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC), which was slammed by civil society groups, as the MIC would “enshrine, expand, and entrench the current system of corporate privilege in future trade deals.”

Photo: Attac / CC BY-SA 2.0

March 2021

CEO | 13-Oct-2016
Les attaques dangereuses contre les réglementations protégeant l’intérêt public et l’environnement ne prendront pas fin suite aux nouvelles propositions européennes sur l’investissement dans les traités de commerce, selon un nouveau rapport.
S2B | 12-Oct-2016
The Joint Interpretative Declaration on the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) reaffirms that investors can bypass the domestic court systems and will enjoy ample rights without any obligations.
The Hill Times | 12-Oct-2016
The Liberals’ relative flexibility on investor-state dispute systems and the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, and an expected visit to India by the PM, may help to move talks along.
SSRN | 3-Oct-2016
One of the objectives of the Union of South-American Nations (UNASUR) is the creation of a regional dispute settlement centre to replace the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
Kluwer Arbitration Blog | 30-Sep-2016
Recent developments indicate there may be increasing interest in the creation of alternative forms of dispute resolution for investor-State disputes. One potential alternative is mediation.
Live Mint | 28-Sep-2016
On Canada’s insistance, India is expected to sign a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with Canada based on an old text, not its new model BIT. The old text contains contentious provisions such as the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism.
TNI | 23-Sep-2016
How CETA’s investor protection rules could result in a boom of investor claims against Canada and the EU.
TNI | 23-Sep-2016
Cómo las normas de protección de las inversiones en el ceta podrían generar un auge de demandas de inversores contra Canadá y la UE.
CEO | 23-Sep-2016
Les règles de protection des investisseurs de l’AECG pourraient mener à l’explosion des poursuites d’investisseurs contre le Canada et l’Union européenne.
Politico | 22-Sep-2016
Critics of the TPP rage against the Investor State Dispute Settlement system. Here’s how to fix it.