Investor-to-state Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) - Not as Unfeasible as It Appears?

• Autorzy: Michał Pyka

Warianty tytułu

System rozstrzygania sporów między inwestorem a państwem (ISDS) w Transatlantyckim Partnerstwie w dziedzinie Handlu i Inwestycji (TTIP) - rzeczywiście niemożliwy do wprowadzenia?

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The article accesses the need for investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism in currently negotiated Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The analysis has been placed in the context of legitimacy crisis of international investment arbitration and the opposition against ISDS expressed in the course of the EU public consultations on ISDS in TTIP. Deriving from this background, the article examines the most important ISDS issues identified in the European Commission Concept Paper of May 2015. It concentrates on the protection of the right to regulate, the functioning of arbitral procedures and ISDS interference with the European Union law. The article proposes plausible solutions to the above problems for the benefit of the EU, its citizens and organizations. It arrives at a conclusion that inclusion of ISDS into TTIP is not as unfeasible as it appears. (original abstract)

Artykuł ocenia potrzebę wprowadzenia systemu rozstrzygania sporów między inwestorem a państwem (ISDS) do negocjowanego obecnie Transatlantyckiego Partnerstwa w dziedzinie Handlu i Inwestycji (TTIP). Analizę umiejscowiono w kontekście kryzysu legitymacji międzynarodowego arbitrażu inwestycyjnego, a także sprzeciwów wobec systemu ISDS wyrażanych w trakcie publicznych konsultacji unijnych w sprawie ISDS w TTIP. Uwzględniając ten kontekst, w artykule odniesiono się do najbardziej istotnych kwestii dotyczących systemu ISDS, zidentyfikowanych w dokumencie Komisji Europejskiej z maja 2015 r. Artykuł koncentruje się na takich zagadnieniach jak ochrona prawa do regulacji, funkcjonowanie procedur arbitrażowych oraz relacja systemu ISDS do prawa Unii Europejskiej. Przedstawia rozwiązania poruszonych problemów służące Unii Europejskiej, jej obywatelom i organizacjom. W zakończeniu postawiony został wniosek, że wprowadzenie systemu ISDS do umowy TTIP nie jest zadaniem niemożliwym do zrealizowania. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Investment policy; Legal regulations; Transatlantic relations; Business partnership; Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP); Investment arbitration

PL

Polityka inwestycyjna; Regulacje prawne; Stosunki transatlantyckie; Partnerstwo biznesowe; Transatlantyckie Partnerstwo w Dziedzinie Handlu i Inwestycji; Arbitraż inwestycyjny

• Czasopismo: Studia Prawnicze i Administracyjne
• Rocznik: 2015
• Numer: nr 11 (1)
• Strony: 9--14

Twórcy

autor

Michał Pyka

• Unwiersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie

Bibliografia

• Balchin C., Chung L. K.-H., Kaushal A., Waibel M., The Backlash against Investment Arbitration, the Netherlands 2010.
• Bishop D., Investor-State Dispute Settlement Under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Have the Negotiations Run Aground?, "ICSID Review", Vol. 30, No. 1, 2015, pp. 1-9.
• European Commission, First round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations starts, 8 July 2013, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=936.
• European Commission, Commission Staff Working Document. Report. Online public consultation on investment protection and investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement (TTIP), 13.01.2015., SWD(2015) 3 final, (European Commission 2015a) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_153044.pdf.
• European Commission, Investment in TTIP and beyond - the path for reform. Enhancing the right to regulate and moving from current ad hoc arbitration towards an Investment Court, Concept Paper, May 2015, (European Commission 2015b) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/may/tradoc_153408.PDF.
• European Parliament, Resolution of 6 April 2011 on the future European international investment policy (2010/2203(INI)), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2011-0141+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN.
• European Parliament. Directoriate General for External Policies of the Union. Directoriate B. Policy Department, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Provisions in the EU's International Investment Agreements. Volume 2-Studies, September 2014, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2014/534979/EXPO_STU%282014%29534979%28ANN01%29_EN.pdf.
• Franck S. D., Legitimacy crisis in investment treaty arbitration: privatizing public international law through inconsistent decisions, "Fordham Law Review", Vol. 73, 2005, pp. 1521-1625.
• Kalicki J., Medeiros S., Fair, Equitable and Ambiguous: What Is Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law?, "ICSID Review" Vol. 22, No. 1, 2007, pp. 24-54.
• Kleinheisterkamp J., European Policy Space in International Investment Law, "ICSID Review" Vol. 27, No. 2, 2012, pp. 416-431.
• Kunoy B., Developments in Indirect Expropriation Case Law in ICSID Transnational Arbitration, "Journal of World Investment and Trade", Vol. 6, 2005, pp. 467-491.
• Lavranos N., Member States' Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs): Lost in Transition?, "Hague Yearbook of International Law", Vol. 24, 2011, pp. 281-311.
• Markert L., The Crucial Question of Future Investment Treaties: Balancing Investors' Rights and Regulatory Interests of Host States, "European Yearbook of International Economic Law" 2011, pp. 145-171.
• Quershi A. H., An Appellate System In International Investment Arbitration? (in:) P. T. Muchlinski, F. Ortino, Ch. Schreuer (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law, Oxford 2008, pp. 1154-1170.
• Quick R., Why TTIP Should Have an Investment Chapter Including ISDS, "Journal of World Trade" Vol. 49, No. 2, 2015, pp. 199-210.
• Schreuer Ch. with Malintoppi L., Reinisch A., Sinclair A., The ICSID Convention: A Commentary, Cambridge 2009.
• Shirlow E., Deference and Indirect Expropriation Analysis in International Investment Law: Observations on Current Approaches and Frameworks for Future Analysis, "ICSID Review", Vol. 29, No. 3, 2014, pp. 595-626.
• Tjetje Ch., Beatens F., The Impact of Investor-State-Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, Study prepared for Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands, 24.06.2014., pp. 1-153, http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2014/06/24/the-impact-of-investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds-in-the-transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership.html.
• Weaver M., The Proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): ISDS Provisions, Reconciliation, and Future Trade Implications, "Emory International Law Review", Vol. 29, 2014, pp. 225-275.