The Research On The Regulation Of “The Friend Of The Court” In The International Investment Arbitration

“The friend of the court”is applied widely and flexibly and play a great role in the litigation of Anglo-American law system.However,“the friend of the court”was introduced into the strange investment arbitration on the international level at the beginning of the 21^st century which was not casual from the perspective of the reasons for its rise.“The friend of the court”has its own necessary existence value.The disputes of international investment arbitration cases largely focus on public policy involved in public interest.Arbitral tribunal's neglect of public interest and foreign investors'urgent pursuit of private interests lead to a loss of balance between the interests of both sides and strong complaints from ordinary citizens.NGOs and other interest groups are also eager to express their views to change the arbitral awards.In addition,the defects of international investment arbitration,such as the maintaining adversary system,the limitation of arbitrators'professions and the inconsistency of arbitral awards,limit the development of international investment arbitration.It is difficult for this system to carry out the mission of maintaining international economic order without undergoing a reform.“The friend of the court”is one of the best solutions to the problems above.Although the FTC,ICSID,UNCITRAL and other administrative bodies of international investment affairs have made some regulations on the participation of“the friend of the court”,the introduction of the new system will inevitably need a running-in period.From the procedural point of view,there are some problems in the“the friend of the court”system as follows:who has the right to decide the participation of“the friend of the court”is still controversial;the details of its review procedure of admission qualification are crude and general;the expansion of the method of its participation has increased the burden of the parties and resulted in the delay of the normal arbitration procedure;the wording of the safeguard of the parties'rights is vague and lack feasibility.From the substantive point of view,the meaning of the“significant interest”which“the friend of the court”has in a particular arbitration case is not clear;the contribution of“amicus brief”is not as valuable as expected.The problems above need to be solved under some balance principles to recover the advantages of traditional arbitration system and make“the friend of the court”play an important role at the same time.