‘Necessary’ in Non-Precluded Measures Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties: The Indian Contribution
Tóm tắt
One of the controversial issues in international investment law disputes has been the interpretation of ‘necessary’ in the non-precluded measures (NPM) provisions in bilateral investment treaties (BITs). investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals have employed different methodologies to interpret ‘necessary’ in the NPM provisions ranging from using the customary international law defence of necessity codified in Article 25 of the ILC Articles on State Responsibility to using the World Trade Organization (WTO)’s necessity analysis. However, a robust interpretative framework for ‘necessary’ in BITs’ NPM provisions remains elusive. Given this aspect, the new treaty practice of India to incorporate the least restrictive alternative measure (LRM) test in its newly signed BITs to interpret ‘necessary’ in NPM provisions has regenerated the debate on the interpretation of ‘necessary’ in NPM provisions. This article argues that the incorporation of the LRM test to interpret ‘necessary’ in NPM provisions marks a rejection of the use of the customary international law defence of necessity to interpret the treaty defence of necessity. The article proposes a two-step analytical interpretative framework aimed at operationalizing the LRM test to interpret ‘necessary’ in BITs’ NPM provisions. This framework is deferential to the host State’s regulatory autonomy and will also ensure that States fully comply with their treaty obligations towards foreign investors.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Alschner W, Hui K (2018) Missing in action: general public policy exceptions in investment treaties. In: Sachs L, Coleman J, Johnson L (eds) Yearbook on international investment law and policy. OUP, Oxford, pp 362–392
Alvarez JE, Brink T (2010) Revisiting the necessity defence: continental casualty v Argentina. In: Sauvant KP (ed) Yearbook on international investment law and policy. OUP, Oxford, pp 319–362
Alvarez JE, Khamsi K (2008) The Argentine crisis and foreign investors. In: Sauvant KP (ed) Yearbook on international investment law and policy. OUP, New York, pp 379–478
Barak A (2012) Proportionality: constitutional rights and their limitations. CUP, Cambridge
Bjorklund AK (2008) Emergency exceptions: state of necessity and force majeure. In: Muchlinski P et al (eds) The Oxford handbook of international investment law. OUP, Oxford, pp 459–523
Blanco SM, Pehl A (2019) National security exceptions in international trade and investment agreements: justiciability and standard of review. Springer, Switzerland
Born G, Morris D, Forrest S (2020) ‘A margin of appreciation’: appreciating its irrelevance in international law. Harv Int Law J 61(1):65–134
Bossche P, Zdouc W (2018) The law and policy of the World Trade Organization: text, cases and materials. CUP, Cambridge
Bown CP, Tratchman JP (2009) Brazil—measures affecting imports of retreated tyres: a balancing act. World Trade Rev 8(1):85–135
Burke-White WW, von Staden A (2008) Investment protection in extraordinary times: the interpretation and application of non-precluded measures provisions in bilateral investment treaties. Va J Int Law 48(2):307–410
Burke-White WW, von Staden A (2010) Private litigation in a public law sphere: the standard of review in investor-state arbitrations. Yale J Int Law 35(2):283–346
Chaisse J (2013) Exploring the confines of international investment and domestic health protections—is a general exceptions clause a forced perspective? Am J Law Med 39:332–360
Desierto D (2010) Necessity and supplementary means of interpretation for non-precluded measures in bilateral investment treaties. Univ Pa J Int Law 31(3):827–934
Dolzer R (2011) Emergency clauses in investment treaties: four versions. In: Arsanjani MH et al (eds) Looking to the future: essays on international law in honour of WM Reisman. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 705–718
Du MM (2010) Autonomy in setting appropriate level of protection: rhetoric or reality? JIEL 13(4):1077–1102
Du M (2016) The necessity test in world trade law. What now? Chin J Int Law 15(4):817–847
Fontanelli F (2012) Necessity killed the GATT: Article XX GATT and the misleading rhetoric about ‘weighing and balancing’. EJLS 5(2):36–56
Gardiner RK (2008) Treaty interpretation. OUP, New York
Henckels C (2016) Protecting regulatory autonomy through greater precision in investment treaties: the TPP, CETA, and TTIP. J Int Econ Law 19(1):27–50
Henckels C (2018) Should investment treaties contain public policy exceptions? Boston Coll Law Rev 59(8):2825–2844
Jans JH (2000) Proportionality revisited. Leg Issues Econ Integr 27(3):239–265
Kabra R (2019) Return of the inconsistent application of the ‘essential security interest’ clause in investment treaty arbitration: CC/Devas v India and Deutsche Telekom v India. ICSID Rev Foreign Invest Law J 34(3):723–753
Kapterian G (2010) A critique of the WTO jurisprudence on necessary. Int Comp Law Q 59(1):89–127
Keene A (2017) The incorporation and interpretation of WTO-style environmental exceptions in international investment agreements. J World Invest Trade 18(1):62–99
Kim J (2018) Balancing regulatory interests through an exceptions framework under the right to regulate provisions in international investment agreements. George Wash Int Law Rev 50:289–356
Kingsbury B, Schill SW (2010) Public law concepts to balance investors’ rights with state regulatory actions in the public interest—the concept of proportionality. In: Schill SW (ed) International investment law and comparative public law. OUP, Oxford, pp 75–105
Kurtz J (2010) Adjudging the exceptional at international investment law: security, public order and financial crisis. ICLQ 59(2):325–371
Kurtz J (2014) Building legitimacy through interpretation in investor-state arbitration. In: Douglas Z et al (eds) The foundations of international investment law. OUP, Oxford, pp 257–296
Lalive P (2010) On the reasoning of international arbitral awards. J Int Dispute Settl 1(1):55–65
Landau T (2009) Reasons for reasons: the tribunal’s duty in investor-state arbitration. ICCA Congress Series, pp 187–208. https://www.hvdb.com/wp-content/uploads/2009-AJvdB-Congress-Series-14-Dublin-2009.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2020
Lowe V (2002) Regulation or expropriation. Curr Leg Probl 55(1):447–466
Martinez A (2010) Invoking state defences in investment treaty arbitration. In: Waibel M et al (eds) The backlash against investment treaty arbitration. Kluwer, The Hague, pp 315–338
McGrady B (2008) Necessity exceptions in WTO law: retreaded tyres, regulatory purpose and cumulative regulatory measures. J Int Econ Law 12(1):153–173
Merkouris P (2015) Article 31(3)(c) VCLT and the principle of systemic integration. Brill Nijhoff, Leiden
Mitchell AD, Henckels C (2013) Variations on a theme: comparing the concept of necessity in international investment law and WTO law. Chic J Int Law 14(1):93–164
Nagy CI (2020) Clash of trade and national public interest in WTO law: the illusion of ‘weighing and balancing’ and the theory of reservation. JIEL 23(1):143–163
Neumann J, Turk E (2003) Necessity revisited: proportionality in World Trade Organization law after Korea-Beef, EC-Asbestos and EC-Sardines. J World Trade 37(1):199–233
Newcombe A (2011) General exceptions in international investment agreements. In: Segger MC, Gehring MW, Newcombe A (eds) Sustainable development in world investment law. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp 351–370
Newcombe A, Paradell L (2009) The law and practice of investment treaties: standards of treatment. Kluwer, The Hague
Nolan MD, Sourgens FG (2010) The limits of discretion? Self-judging emergency clauses in international investment agreements. In: Sauvant K (ed) Yearbook of international investment law and policy. OUP, Oxford, pp 362–418
Nottage LR (2016) Rebalancing investment treaties and investor-state arbitration: two approaches. J World Invest Trade 17(6):1015–1040
Orakhelashvili A (2003) Restrictive interpretation of human rights treaties in the recent jurisprudence of the European court of Human Rights. EJIL 14(3):529–568
Ortino F (2012) Legal reasoning of international investment tribunals: a typology of egregious failures. J Int Dispute Settl 3(1):31–52
Paparinskis M (2011) Investment treaty interpretation and customary investment law: preliminary remarks. In: Brown C, Miles K (eds) Evolution in investment treaty law and arbitration. CUP, Cambridge, pp 65–96
Pathirana D, McLaughlin M (2020) Non-precluded measures clauses: regimes, trends and practice in international investment law and arbitration. In: Chaisse J, Choukroune L, Jusoh S (eds) Handbook of international investment law and policy. Springer, Switzerland. https://link-springer-com-443.webvpn.fjmu.edu.cn/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-981-13-5744-2_6-1. Accessed on 15 July 2020
Rajput A (2017) Protection of foreign investment in India and investment treaty arbitration. Kluwer, The Hague
Ranjan P (2019a) Police powers, indirect expropriation in international investment law and Article 31(3)(c) of the VCLT: a critique of Philip Morris v Uruguay. Asian J Int Law 9(1):98–124
Ranjan P (2019b) India and bilateral investment treaties: refusal, acceptance, backlash. Oxford University Press, New Delhi
Regan DH (2007) The meaning of ‘necessary’ in GATT Article XX and GATS Article XIV: the myth of cost- benefit balancing. World Trade Rev 6(3):347–369
Reinisch A (2007) Necessity in international investment arbitration—an unnecessary split of opinions in recent ICSID cases? J World Invest Trade 8(2):191–214
Reinisch A (2010) Necessity in investment arbitration. Neth Yearb Int Law 41:137–158
Simma B (2011) Foreign investment arbitration: a place for human rights. Int Comp Law Q 60(3):573–596
Sinha A (2017) Non-precluded measures provisions in bilateral investment treaties of South Asian countries. Asian J Int Law 7(2):227–263
Sloane RD (2012) On the use of and abuse of necessity in the law of state responsibility. AJIL 106(3):447–508
Stone Sweet A (2010) Investor-state arbitration: proportionality’s new frontier. Law Ethics Hum Rights 4(1):47–76
Sykes AO (2003) The least restrictive means. Univ Chic Law Rev 70(1):403–419
Titi C (2014) The right to regulate in international investment law. Hart, Oxford
UNCTAD (2009) The protection of national security in IIAs. UNCTAD series on international investment policies for development. United Nations, New York and Geneva
UNCTAD (2020) World investment report 2020—international production beyond pandemic. United Nations, New York and Geneva
Vandevelde KJ (2013) Rebalancing through exceptions. Lewis Clark Law Rev 17(2):449–459
Viñuales JE (2008) State of necessity and peremptory norms in international investment law. Law Bus Rev Am 14(1):79–103
Viñuales JE (2020) Seven ways of escaping a rule: of exceptions and their avatars in international law. In: Bartels L, Paddeu F (eds) Exceptions and defences in international law. OUP, Oxford, pp 65–87