Study On The Right To Regulate In International Investment Agreements

The host country’s regulatory power reflects a country’s national sovereignty,which originates from the authorization of domestic law and is recognized by customary international law.Early countries built a multilateral framework within the scope of world sovereignty by transferring part of their sovereignty.However,recently,the framework of multilateral investment treaties has not made substantial progress.However,issues such as environmental protection and the protection of human rights have erupted worldwide.They have to modify public interest laws and policies to cope with the surge in globalization issues.Changes in domestic regulations have caused sovereign states to be sued frequently.With the development of investment treaty arbitration practices,many countries have gradually realized that the investment treaty system is effective in dealing with economic crises and environmental The international community has begun to explore how to strengthen the regulatory power,and the international community has begun to re-emphasize what rights the host country should enjoy in the investment rules.However,strengthening the regulatory power is not to reduce the degree of protection of investors and detract from their interests.The host country can only absorb the medium and long-term benefits of foreign investment if it has an appropriate and effective domestic regulatory environment.Therefore,how to improve the quality of regulation and grasp the direction of regulation is The key to attracting foreign investment and giving full play to the role of foreign investment in domestic industries is to optimize the regulatory power of the host country.From the perspective of international investment agreements and host countries regulatory powers,this article analyzes and studies the problems existing in relevant entities and procedural clauses in existing international investment agreements,in order to provide some ideas for promoting the balance of rights in the new generation of international investment agreements.The language includes the following four parts:The first part introduces the relevant theories of the host country’s regulatory power in international investment agreements.First,it introduces the legal attributes of the host country’s regulatory power and its exercise boundary.Secondly,it explains the legitimacy of the rejuvenation of the host country’s regulatory power in the international investment agreement.Finally,it describes the public purpose of each country to maintain the regulatory power of the host country and the different considerations of the North and South countries.The second part mainly introduces the main challenges faced by the regulatory power of host countries in international investment agreements,starting from the two aspects of substantive rules and procedural rules.Substantive rules are mainly reflected in the ambiguity of substantive terms,such as fair and just treatment clauses;procedural rules are mainly manifested in aspects such as low transparency and excessive jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal.The third part mainly introduces the measures to optimize the host country’s regulatory power in international investment agreements,starting from two aspects of entity and procedure.The entity aspect mainly refines the substantive clauses.The refined substantive rules extend the scope and space of the host country’s regulatory power.The procedural rules are aimed at improving the transparency of the arbitral tribunal and restricting the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal.Improving the procedural rules broadens the depth and breadth of the host country’s participation in the settlement of investment disputes.Finally,it mainly puts forward considerations and suggestions around the regulatory power of the host country in China’s investment agreement.On the issue of investor interests and the host country’s regulatory power,China must have its own position,and on this basis,improve international investment agreements from both substantive and procedural terms.