Public Interest And Procedural Reform In International Investment Arbitration

With the international investment increasing among nations, the amount ofdisputes between investors and countries has gone up steadily. Internationalinvestment arbitration has therefore, become one of the most important methods forresolving these disputes. It has been, overall, a success in de-politicalising the disputesand promoting the development of the international investment. However, problemstill remains. One of the most serious ones is the adverse impact investmentarbitration has on countries’ public interest. In most investment arbitration cases,although sometimes countries take measure in order to protect the public interest, theystill suffer from arbitration cases and huge amount of compensation brought byinvestors on the grounds that they violated bilateral investment treaties. Thisdissertation considers that one of the most important reasons lies in theinappropriateness of the procedures of investment arbitration. This dissertation seeksto address this issue and put forward relevant suggestions.This dissertation consists of three chapters, discussing the challenge ofinvestment arbitration to public interest, several issues in procedural reform ofinvestment arbitration and suggestions for PRC.The first chapter is made up of three sections regarding the public interest issuesin investment arbitration, the challenge of investment arbitration procedures to publicinterest and the tendency in procedural reform. The ignorance of public interest hasmaterial adverse impact on investment arbitration. Some developing countries, evendeveloped countries, have lost faith in the arbitration. One of the most importantreasons is that the procedures of investment arbitration derive from commercial arbitration and share its characteristic of confidentiality, commercialisation andfinalisation. There have been reforms called from international academics andinstitutions, including radical reform method and mild one. The latter is what mostcall for.The second chapter consists of four sections, discussing some specific issues inthe mild reform of investment arbitration procedures, including transparency, amicuscuriae, private arbitrators and appellate mechanism. This chapter will discuss theadvantages and disadvantages of these issues, the current international practicesregarding these issues and put forward some suggestions to better protect the publicinterest.The third chapter has two sections, discussing investment arbitration and Chinaand some suggestions on China’s attitudes toward the reform of investment arbitrationprocedures. The history of the development of investment arbitration in China has notbeen long but in2011there emerged the very first case in which China was therespondent. This chapter will analyse this case and put forward some advices on whatChina should act to deal with the procedural reform of investment arbitration in orderto be better prepared for future cases.