After a decade of working on it, my book is finally out with @OUPLaw.
The book argues that we have entered a new era: a backlash against #investment arbitration has given way to a backlash by arbitrators as new treaties produce old outcomes.🧵(1/9)
The book (1) charters how states have reformed their investment treaties, (2) tracks how these reforms have been dulled or reversed in investment arbitration, & (3) suggests ways to shift the regime's centre of gravity from old to new treaties. (2/9)
Why spent 10 years on this? Because it was fun to write about but also because it is important.
States seeking to rebalancing investment protection with host state policy space have changed the law in the books, but not the law in action. (3/9)
States have spent 20ys reforming their investment treaties to correct deficiencies of older treaties.
Scholars and policymakers, placing high hopes on these reforms, expected them to rebalance outcomes in arbitration.
However, the first set of arbitration awards under these reformed treaties suggests that little has changed in practice.
Take general exceptions to protect public health or the environment. They are a novelty in investment treaties, but have become common. (5/9)
Last year's Eco Oro decision had to make sense of such an exception and adopted an interpretation that, to quote @jbentonheath, "declar[ed] this provision to be effectively irrelevant in investment arbitration."
The book tries to explain and make sense of what is going on and suggests ways to ensure the success of state-driven reform. For now, I will stop here. If you want to read on, here is discount link to the book: global.oup.com/academic/produ… (8/9)
After being off Twitter for the summer to finish my book "New Treaties, Old Outcomes" on how new-generation investment treaties are interpreted like old ones, this is the first tweet I see. 👇
Well, I'll have to add a couple of new paragraphs to the manuscript... 🧵
The Eco Oro award beautifully proves the book's point.
The case is based on the Canada-Colombia FTA, a new treaty with general exception. Article 2201(3) shields environmental measures from liability under strict conditions even when they violate the Investment Chapter.
Yet, the tribunal ignored this explicit hierarchy (environment > investment) and reproduced the reasoning of past awards rendered under agreements without exceptions that states must protect the environment while observing investment commitments.
My paper on "The OECD Multilateral Tax Instrument: A Model for Reforming The International Investment Regime?" is out in the Brooklyn J. of Int'l Law: brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol45/iss…
It has been quite a journey... (thread)
The international tax regime turns out to be fascinating - with many parallels to the international investment regime. Yet, few have written about the two comparatively, with @rpolancolazo@JoostPauwelyn@JChaisse being notable exceptions.
Some of the "gems" I came across was a 1974 article by Charles Irish. His argument that developing states stumbled into tax treaties without understanding their risks and benefits mirrors @laugepoulsen masterful work on BITs decades later.