Since I seem to only blog about investor-state dispute related issues, I thought I pass along a recent UNCTAD policy note about reforming the ISD system.
UNCTAD's summary of the report's key findings:
Concerns with the current ISDS system relate, among others things, to a perceived deficit of legitimacy and transparency; contradictions between arbitral awards; difficulties in correcting erroneous arbitral decisions; questions about the independence and impartiality of arbitrators; and the length and the costs of arbitral procedures. These challenges have given rise to a broad discussion about the need to reform the current system of investment arbitration. To give shape to this debate, the Note puts forward five main reform paths:
- Promoting alternative dispute resolution.
- Tailoring the existing system through individual IIAs.
- Limiting investor access to ISDS.
- Introducing an appeals facility.
- Creating a standing investment court.