Eco Oro v. Colombia, a recently released decision involving a mining concession under the Canada-Colombia FTA, issued this month. It’s troubling for a # of reasons. This thread focuses only on the tribunal’s interpretation of the general exceptions provision. 2/x
In advance of our Vaccine Equity and International Economic Law event next week (register here: miami.zoom.us/webinar/regist…), I am compiling some resources focused specifically on the proposed #TRIPS waiver.
A thread with links. 1/x
Proposed text of the waiver, submitted to the TRIPS Council in October 2020, is here. 2/x
Today in Investment Law and Policy, we discussed "Investment Law in Developing Countries.” This is a problematic category, but the framing allows us to discuss important questions like law-makers vs. law-takers, and the effect of investment on local & indigenous communities. 1/
The idea of classifying the world as “developed” and “developing” is problematic and there’s no one way to do it. I started, very crudely, with this map from @worldbankdata, classifying countries by per capita GNI. Like I said, very crude, but keep this image in your mind. 2/
Mar 17, 2021 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
A continuation of my thread on investment and national security. I’m so enthusiastic about this topic I couldn’t fit it all in a single thread, it seems. …
I left off with the US-Peru FTA and its self-judging security footnote. That one is interesting, because 2 years later China concluded a PTA with Peru, and flipped the script, making a non-self-judging footnote. It’s interesting to speculate as to why. 26/
Mar 17, 2021 • 26 tweets • 13 min read
Today in investment law and policy, we’re talking about investment and national security (my favorite topic). The students read treaty text and Continental Casualty v Arg, and also watched a short recorded lecture by me. Other links below were not assigned to students. 1/
First, a little background from my recorded lecture. When folks say that today there is greater overlap between #NatSec & #ISDS, what do they mean? What kinds of measures are they talking about? How would they violate investment rules? 2/
Mar 15, 2021 • 16 tweets • 4 min read
Both good thoughts. Because I can’t get back to writing my draft article until I get this off my chest, a long thread about article length. These observations are triggered by Dave’s suggestion but not directed at these points, which I think are basically good. /1
2 hypotheses and 1 argument about Why L Rev Articles Are So Long:
1. It’s as much a function of who is reading/reviewing as it is about mere word limits/expectations.
2. Jr. scholars are likely going to bear the brunt of the Your Article Is Too Long complaint. /2
Jan 11, 2020 • 17 tweets • 7 min read
A thread on what’s going on in this odd (or, as @t_streinz put it, “quirky”) essay. Owing to my association with @nyuiilj, I’ve been a longtime consumer of US administrative law scholarship, which I found incredibly generative of ideas for the study of int’l institutions. /1
I think US admin scholarship tends to break down according to whether you believe: 1. that the administrative state is a practical necessity; and 2. that administrative governance suffers from something like a “deficit” of democratic legiitimacy. Like this:
/2
Oct 24, 2019 • 10 tweets • 5 min read
Really enjoyed this post from @AntheaERoberts@taylor__stjohn. There are many good pieces about the proposals for ISDS reforms & tradeoffs. What is unique about this piece is its emphasis on a political, deliberative forum as the emerging system's "center." Initial reactions 1/n.
I agree that it's important to think about the diplomatic and political fora that will compliment/steer whatever court or appellate process is eventually set up. I've learned a lot from @loyaladvisor about this dimension of the trading system. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… 2/n
Jun 11, 2019 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
A provocative take on the US national security tariffs. bit.ly/31peM8A. @rodrikdani suggests "the best we can hope for is what one might call 'democracy-enhancing global governance'" based on procedural requirements. 1/4
I generally agree with the diagnosis. I'm skeptical that the response is as easy as shifting from substantive to procedural review (e.g., for transparency). In practice, these procedural principles are so open-ended they can simply mask a more substantive decision. 2/4
Apr 5, 2019 • 31 tweets • 10 min read
/1 Just finished a quick first read of the WTO panel decision today on Article XXI (Russia - Traffic in Transit, DS512). Thanks @rdmcdougall@howserob. Some very preliminary reactions for purposes of discussion. (Long thread).
/2 Section 7.5.2 is in some sense as important as the panel's judgment, as it sets out the positions of member states. We already had some sense of the members' positions, and some (US, EU, Australia included) had released their briefs. At least 2 interesting things there:
