ICSID and the integration of international economic legal standards

“

From the prohibition of expropriation to the most-favored nation clause, from fair and equitable treatment to national treatment, and so on: ICSID’s contribution to the discussion and development over the meaning and scope of these fundamental protections is undeniable, and this is due to the push for transparency that ICSID not only seconded but, in some respect, championed. The current EU proposal of replacing investment arbitration with a standing court implicitly recognizes a success story: investment disputes have become so common that the EU now feels it is high time to centralize them under a single system. Conversely, however, the EU proposal explicitly suggests that the contribution of investment arbitration (and ICSID) to the integration (in the sense of consistent understanding) of legal and business economic standards is by this time exhausted, or anyways past its peak: as an incomplete system made of final awards and limited grounds of annulment, the Convention is unable to “cure” on its own the gaps inherent in its de-centralized design: e.g., lack of interpretive consistency, regulatory chill, costs, and the polarization of adjudicators (both selection and profiles).

”