Corrupt on Foreign Investment and the Host State’s Responsibility in the ICSID Arbitral Tribunal Procedure

Subject Areas : International Legal Research

Javad Salehi ¹

1 - Associate Professor of Payam-e-Noor University, Tehran, Iran. Email: [e-mail]

Received: 2022-04-25 Accepted : 2022-06-16 Published : 2022-09-23

Keywords: Foreign Investor, International Investment Law, Host State, ICSID Arbitration Tribunal,

Abstract :

Field and Aims: Corrupt on foreign investment and its results in the ICSID procedure is one of the new topics in international investment law. Investigating the different dimensions and the impact of the ICSID procedure on investor’s rights and the responsibility of the host state in relation to foreign investment is of importance, objectives and subject matter of this article.Method: The research method is descriptive-analytical and critical to answer a question, what is the impact of corrupted foreign investment on investor rights and the responsibility of the host state in the ICSID procedure?Finding and Conclusion: The findings show that arbitration based on the investment treaty combined with corruption is rejected at the request of the foreign investor in the ICSID. This procedure has two achievements, two on the same coin. First, the investor is deprived of legal protections and arbitration. Ignoring investor rights resulting from playing its role as the first party to corruption is self-imposed and inevitable. Second, the host state is clear of responsibility for the foreign investor by corruption defense and proving it. The situation suggests a benefit of corruption for the host state, while host state agents are also the second party to corruption.

References:

ابراهیم‌پور اسنجان، عادل و سلیمانیف مائده. (1400). تقابل ‌و تعامل سلب مالکیت غیرمستقیم و تنظیم‌گری دولت میزبان. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 51(2)، 839-819.

https://civilica.com/doc/1216077/

- بهزادی پارسی، آرش و سیفی، جمال. (1400). رابطۀ صلاحیت قانون‌گذاری دولت‌ها با انتظارات مشروع سرمایه‌گذاران خارجی در موافقت‌نامه‌های بین‌المللی. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 51(2)، 454 – 431.

https://journal.ut.ac.ir/article_80108.html

- پیری، مهدی؛ شکیب، محمدرضا و احمدپور، بهاره. (1397). بررسی رویکرد دیوان‌های داوری ایکسید به دفاع ضرورت و شرط استثنا: تأملی بر پرونده‌های گازی آرژانتین. مطالعات حقوق انرژی، 4(2)، 403-377.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/412187/

- تیموری، محمدصادق؛ جنیدی، لعیا؛ صقری، محمد و عباسیان، رضا. (1397). سلب مالکیت غیر‌مستقیم سرمایه‌گذاران خارجی؛ جستاری در حقوق ایران و بین‌الملل. فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، 6(24)، 36-9.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/389388/

- رضائی، علی و صالحی، مذکور. (1399). قرار منع اقامه یا پیگیرد دعوا صادره از دیوان‌های داوری در داوری تجاری بین‌المللی. فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، 8(30)، 36-9.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/428066/

- زمانی، قاسم و بذار، وحید. (1397). فرض وجود خطر به‌عنوان عاملی تأثیرگذار بر مسئولیت در اختلافات ناشی از سرمایه‌گذاری خارجی با تأکید بر رویۀ داوری بین‌المللی. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، 48(2)، 245-227.

https://journal.ut.ac.ir/article_66732.html

- زمانی، قاسم و شیرعلیزاده، ابوالفضل. (1398). اصول و رویه تفسیر معاهدات سرمایه‌گذاری بین‌المللی توسط محاکم داوری و ترجیح حقوق بین‌الملل بر حقوق داخلی. مجله حقوقی دادگستری، 83(105)، 136-111.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/415602/

- کرم‌زاده، سیامک و روزگاری آقبلاغ، خلیل. (1398). ارزیابی «قانونی بودن سرمایه‌گذاری» در رویۀ ایکسید. مجله حقوق خصوصی، 16(1)، 41-21.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/415571

- مرادی، رامین؛ روحانی، کارن و نصیری لاریمی، رضا. (1399). بررسی پیامدهای قوانین مبارزه با رشوه‌خواری خارجی بر تجارت و سرمایه‌گذاری خارجی کشورهای درحال‌توسعه.  فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌المللی، 17(3)، 134-113.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/458667/

- نوری یوشانلویی، جعفر و شاهمرادی، عصمت. (1396). آثار حقوقی فساد بر قراردادهای نفت و گاز.  مطالعات حقوق انرژی، 3(1)، 133-115.

http://ensani.ir/fa/article/412162/

- McLachlan, Campbell; Laurence Shore and Matthew Weiniger. (2008). International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles. Oxford University Press.

- Newcombe, Andrew. (2011). Investor Misconduct: Jurisdiction, Admissibility or Merits?”, in; Chester Brown and Kate Miles (eds.), Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration. Cambridge University Press.

- Bulovsky, T. Andrew. (2019). Promises Unfulfilled: How Investment Arbitration Tribunals Mishandle Corruption Claims and Undermine International Development. Michigan Law Review, 118(1), 117-147.

https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol118/iss1/4/

- Carrington, D. Paul. (2010). Enforcing International Corrupt Practices Law. Michigan Journal of International Law Michigan Journal of International Law, 32(1), 129-164.  https://www.proquest.com/docview/818908480

- Gilman, Eric. (2009). Legal Transplants in Trade and Investment Agreements: Understanding the Exportation of U.S. Law to Latin America. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 41, 263-285.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Legal-Transplants-in-Trade-and-Investment-the-of-to-Gillman/8a6870e93b557db6eeed8d9f4f936f86a96fa043

- Halpern, S. Michaela. (2016). Corruption as a Complete Defense in Investment Arbitration or Part of a Balance?. Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution, 23(2), 101-121.

https://ilsquare.org/2016/02/02/corruption-as-a-defense-in-international-investment-arbitration/

- Haugeneder, Florian. (2009). Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration. the Journal of World Investment and Trade, 10(3), 323-339.

https://www.academia.edu/36299630/Corruption_in_Investor_State_Arbitration_It_Takes_Two_to_Tango

- Hepburn, Jarrod. (2014). In Accordance with Which Host State Laws? Restoring the ‘Defence’ of Investor Illegality in Investment Arbitration. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 5(3), 531-559.

https://academic.oup.com/jids/article-abstract/5/3/531/2908335

- Kulick, Andreas and Carsten Wendler. (2010). A Corrupt Way to Handle Corruption? Thoughts on the Recent ICSID Case Law on Corruption. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 37(1), 61-85.

https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/Legal+Issues+of+Economic+Integration/37.1/LEIE2010006

- Llamzon, Aloysius. (2008). The Control of Corruption through International Investment Arbitration: Potential and Limitations. American Society of International Law, 102(4), 208-212.

https://ur.booksc.me/book/57114889/e9e82a

- Martsekis, George. (2019). Corruption as a Jurisdiction Bar in Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Strategic Reform. the Journal of the Institute for Transnational Arbitration, 1(2), 76-97.

https://www.itainreview.org/articles/Fall2019/corruption-as-a-jurisdiction-bar-in-investment-treaty-arbitration.html

- Meshel, Tamar. (2013). The Use and Misuse of the Corruption Defence in International Investment Arbitration. The Journal of International Arbitration, 30(3), 267-282.  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2368088

- Odumosu, T. Ibironke. (2011). International Investment Arbitration and Corruption Claims: An Analysis of Word Duty Free v. Kenya. the Law and Development Review, 4(3), 88-129.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.2202/1943-3867.1118/html

- Tirado, Joe; Matthew Page and Daniel Meagher. (2014). Corruption Investigations by Governmental Authorities and Investment Arbitration: An Uneasy Relationship. ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, 29(2), 493-513.

https://academic.oup.com/icsidreview/issue/29/2

- Yackee, W. Jason. (2011). Investment Treaties and Investor Corruption: An Emerging Defense for Host States?. Virginia Journal of International Law, 52, 723-745.

https://www.iisd.org/itn/en/2012/10/19/investment-treaties-and-investor-corruption-an-emerging-defense-for-host-states/

- The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. (2006). Award, World Duty Free Co Ltd v. Republic of Kenya. 4 October 2006, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/7.

- The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. (2009). Award, Phoenix Action v. Czech Republic. 15 April 2009, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/5.

- The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. (2010). Award, Alasdair Ross Anderson v. Republic of Costa Rica. 19 May 2010, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/07/3.

- The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. (2013). Award, Metal-Tech Ltd v. The Republic of Uzbekistan. 4 October 2013, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/3.