The Momentum of Domestic Criminal Proceedings Supervision Through Investment Treaty Arbitration
24 Pages Posted: 10 Aug 2017
Date Written: August 9, 2017
Investor-State arbitration represents an intriguing topic whose relationship with EU law remains partially unsettled. It is becoming increasingly relevant for criminal law practitioners as the jurisprudence of arbitral tribunals shows to consider interim measures interfering with or impacting upon criminal investigations in the so called “host State”. In the past, Investor-State arbitration has been accused of upholding economic interests of multi-national companies (MNC) against at the detriment of developing States and other values and purported as a vehicle of domination imposing “neo-liberal rule of law”. The intrusions into spaces pertaining to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by host States has further suggested a possible misuse to escape prosecution. Although the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction by arbitral tribunals jurisdiction may mostly be praised, its legal base is still questionable and some recent "intra-EU" digressions in the field of criminal law raise even more doubts.
Keywords: Bilateral Investment Treaties, investor State arbitration, ICSID, diplomatic protection, res iudicata, privies, supervisory jurisdiction, interim measures, stay of criminal proceedings, integrity of the proceeding, Exclusiveness of remedies, European Union Law, Human rights, extradition
JEL Classification: K10, K14, K29, K13, K33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation