Latest News
International Convention on Investment Dispute Settlement: Establishing Confidence and Jurisdiction
International Convention on Investment Dispute Settlement: Establishing Confidence and Jurisdiction
The International Convention on the Settlement of the Investment Dispute between the States and the other states was submitted in the year 1965 by the IBRD i.e., International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for the signatures and ratification and it came into force on the 14th October 1966 as it also establishes as an International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes. The convention does not specifically define the term investment because of the broad scope and limit of the arbitrary potential involved in it, another reason to eliminate the term or its definition is that it requires mutual consent from the parties. The function of the Centre was to be an anonymous organization and it also offered new facilities mainly for the resolution of disputes between the states and investors from foreign states with arbitration and conciliation as a mechanism.[1] The main aim of the conventions originally was to resolve the problem to provide a permanent platform for the settlement of the investment disputes. It provides the international methods of dispute resolution along with the adaption to the nature of the disputes and the party's identity it also maintains the balance between the states and the foreign investors. Thus the convention can considered one of the major steps in the promotion of the climate of confidence between the state and the investors are established by the rule of law when it comes to international investment.
Another problem in this was deciding the jurisdiction thus after various discussions the jurisdiction of the Centre was based on mainly three postulates such as- consent of the parties, the identity of the parties, and, the nature of the disputes. The main of all the 3 is the consent of the party as it plays a major role in the proceeding continuance,[2] and it is also considered the cornerstone of the center's jurisdiction, as it also takes the rest voluntarily. The investor and the states have all the directions given to decide whether they want to take the advice of the center or not else they can have the recourse to the other settlement options. Therefore when it comes to the jurisdiction of the Centre it is quite limited as the legal or law-related disputes occurring out of the investment will not be taken or considered under the ambit or the Centre’s Jurisdiction as if it would also have a political character or the conflicts of the interests between the parties out of the unit. The aspect of the arbitration has been widely and strongly considered as compared to the provisions related to the conciliation as the arbitration has proven more effective in resolving the investment-related disputes.[3] The attempt of the convention to reconcile the investor's interest and the state should be promoted to create confidence which is also essential for the flow of the private capital in the development.
References
[1] Delaume, Georges R. "Convention on the settlement of investment disputes between states and nationals of other states." Int'l L.. Vol. 1. 1966.
[2] Broches, Aron. "The convention on the settlement of investment disputes between states and nationals of other states." Selected Essays. Brill Nijhoff, 1995. 188-239.
[3] Farley, Andrew N. "Commentary: The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States." Duq. UL Rev. 5 (1966): 19.
- The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes was introduced in 1965 by the IBRD to create an International Centre for resolving investment disputes, promoting a rule-of-law environment.
- The convention avoids a specific definition of investment.
- It emphasis on arbitration over conciliation reflects its effectiveness.
