Are Investment Tribunals Adjudicating Political Disputes? Some Reflections on the Repoliticization of Investment Disputes and (New) Forms of Diplomatic Protection

Journal of International Arbitration 32 (3), 2015, p. 261-288

32 Pages Posted: 12 Oct 2015 Last revised: 10 Apr 2020

See all articles by Catharine Titi

Catharine Titi

CNRS; University Paris II Panthéon-Assas

Date Written: 2015

Abstract

Conceived from its inception as a tool for the depoliticization of disputes involving a foreign investor and a sovereign state, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) has emerged as a popular alternative to state justice and diplomatic protection and it has evolved into the centerpiece and guarantor of the international system of investment protections. And yet, despite the common perception of its neutrality as a forum for the non-political resolution of disputes, the scope of subject matters that fall within the purview of arbitral control and the utilization of political means by states and investors alike in order to interfere with or influence the arbitral process shed light on some unusual aspects of investment arbitration and reveal that ISDS has been heading down a trajectory of repoliticization.

Keywords: repoliticization, depoliticization, investment arbitration, ISDS

JEL Classification: F02, F13, F21, F53, K41, K39, K40, K10, K33, K49, K12, K19, K20, K29, H70, E22, H87, F50, F52

Suggested Citation

Titi, Catharine, Are Investment Tribunals Adjudicating Political Disputes? Some Reflections on the Repoliticization of Investment Disputes and (New) Forms of Diplomatic Protection (2015). Journal of International Arbitration 32 (3), 2015, p. 261-288. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2671189

University Paris II Panthéon-Assas ( email )

CERSA, 12 place du Panthéon
Paris, 75005
France

HOME PAGE: http://cersa.cnrs.fr/titi-catharine/

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
226
Abstract Views
797
rank
145,499
PlumX Metrics