Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2-2016
Abstract
The negotiation of several mega-treaties in 2015, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), and other regional agreements, has generated substantial public discussion about the protections and privileges afforded to multinational enterprises through the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism in these treaties. ISDS has increasingly raised concerns among certain governments and civil society groups, particularly as a growing number of ISDS cases involve investors challenging a range of governmental measures taken in good faith and in the public interest, including measures related to environmental protection, public health and safety, and financial stability. Even representatives of international businesses – the purported beneficiaries of these texts – have voiced concerns about the costs of ISDS proceedings, uncertainty regarding outcomes of disputes, and an absence of rules to ensure the independence and impartiality of arbitrators.
Disciplines
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | European Law | Human Rights Law | International Humanitarian Law | International Law | Law
Recommended Citation
Lise Johnson & Lisa E. Sachs,
The Outsized Costs of Investor–State Dispute Settlement,
16(1)
AIB Insights
10
(2016).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sustainable_investment_staffpubs/114
Included in
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, European Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Humanitarian Law Commons, International Law Commons