Investor – State dispute settlement mechanisms, that are part of more than 3000 bilateral investment treaties and other legal instruments, have been the center of numerous critics during the last years. Therefore, firstly this paper analyses the risks of International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) or Permanent Court of Arbitration, among others, which were identified by referents in academia, civil society and governments. The paper specifically the designation of arbitrators, the lack of an instance of appeal, the wide concept of protected investment and social factor in investment arbitration, specially arbitrator’s gender and nationality.
Additionally, the paper studies some of the different ways towards the investor – State dispute settlement reform or attempts of partial improvement of the system and develops specific examples. For example the carved – out of some areas of investor – State dispute settlement, such as the case of measures of tobacco control of the Transpacific Partnership Agreement; the constitution of an Investment Court System as it is proposed by the European Union in the international treaties that area being under negotiation with third parties; or the exclusion of investor – State dispute settlement of investment protection agreements, for example the new Brazilian model of Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreement.
Bas Vilizzio, M. (2017). Positions and debates on investor dispute resolution mechanisms – State. Revista Tribuna Internacional, 6(11). https://doi.org/10.5354/rti.v6i11.46136
