Analysis Of The Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism Of The Energy Charter Treaty

21st century is the century of energy. Energy has become the basis of national security, economic development and global stability. At the macro level of national development strategies, investment plays an important role in maintaining a nation’s rapid economic growth and the prosperity and stability of the world economic system. In the international society’s energy system, the energy product price changes often have a butterfly effect, and can arouse large price fluctuation in other industrial field. At the same time, the international energy investment often affect each and every country’s sensitive nerves, and it seems especially important that how to properly settle the disputes arising from the process of energy investment. Energy Charter Treaty, as a multilateral treaty in the field of international energy investment, has become an important means to settle every kind of energy investment dispute. It aims to ensure the effective operation of the energy market and to guarantee the market fairness and openness. So far, China has grown into the main energy consumption power, and China will participate in more and more international energy investment in the future. However, till now, China hasn’t joined any energy organizations, or signed Energy Charter Treaty, just act as one of its observing country. Faced with the situation, China should deepen its understanding and application of the related legal systems of international energy investment, and gradually have the initiative and speaking right in the field of international energy investment.The dispute settlement mechanism of the energy charter treaty is unique in the international dispute settlement system. The scope of its uniqueness is mainly manifested in dispute settlement of the diversity of universality and dispute settlement. From the perspective of the scope of dispute settlement, it includes investment and trade, transit, competition and environment. From the form, dispute settlement procedure between both countries and investors, and including the state between the dispute settlement procedures. Although many bilateral investment treaty also specifies the program between nations and countries, with investors, but it is only used to solve investment disputes. The energy charter treaty with the European energy charter the biggest difference is that it has a complete dispute settlement mechanism. In fact, this dispute settlement mechanism is what makes the treaty has the legal binding, distinguishes it from the general political treaty and declaration. At the same time, the energy charter treaty based on the energy value chain, for the energy value chain of each link to provide energy investment, energy, energy transit trade and legal protection, energy and environment to ensure the normal operation of each link of the energy value chain.In accordance with the stipulation of Energy Charter Treaty, there are commonly two dispute settlement mechanisms: one is the investment dispute mechanism among the investors and the contracting countries; two is the investment dispute mechanism among different contracting countries, and these two mechanisms also reflect the two kinds of subjects in the dispute mechanisms. For Energy Charter Treaty, the core of its investment arbitration clause is the right of jurisdiction. For the arbitration cases, two steps are generally included: the first step is called preliminary ruling, which mainly deals with the legal and jurisdiction questions; and the second step is called final ruling, which mainly deal with the questions of fact and disputes. After the right of jurisdiction is confirmed, the selection of arbitration rules is also involved in the subsequent arbitration process, which greatly influences the final arbitration results. In accordance with the general international conventions, ICSID(The International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes) or International Commercial Arbitration Association, such as SCC(The Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce), can be selected for arbitration. Generally speaking, ICSID sets a higher threshold in terms of investment arbitration, but SCC has a lower threshold and is suitable for the medium and small investors. Meanwhile, ICSID is more targeted to the settlement of direct disputes among investors and countries, according to the existing cases mentioned in Energy Charter Treaty, most of the investors still submit the causes to ICSID for arbitration, and ICSID is still popular among the many case investors. In the specific dispute settlement procedures, the disputes among the investors and the host country are often required to be friendly settled, if it fails, they can go to arbitration. Though the settlement procedures are regulated for the disputes among the contracting countries, the disputes are settled in the diplomatic channels in the current practices.As for China’s present status of energy investment, China still lacks experience in the multilateral energy cooperation and doesn’t form a comprehensive energy reserve system, so China has no speaking right in the international energy market. The relatively sound dispute coping modes in Energy Charter Treaty can provide a standard for China’s solutions to all kinds of resource conflicts, are conducive to realizing the smooth solution to all kinds of resource conflicts, and also beneficial to maintaining China’s energy safety and energy transportation. However, we should also realize that Energy Charter Treaty adopts the approaches of equal treatment to all kinds of disputes arising from the stage of energy investment liberalization, but doesn’t take into account the fact that the developing countries are generally in the weak position, which also influences China, which is also a developing country. Therefore, if we just make an analysis from the perspective of investment dispute mechanism in Energy Charter Treaty, China can accept the Treaty and try out it, but doesn’t approve its effectiveness, and make a decision after the probationary period.