Arbitraje de inversiones y soberanía estatal: tensiones y desafíos

Felipe Andrés Cristancho Escobar

doi:10.24142/raju.v20n41a6

Autores/as

Felipe Andrés Cristancho Escobar Universidad de Miskolc https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2988-9494

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24142/raju.v20n41a6

Palabras clave:

arbitraje de inversiones, soberanía estatal, expectativas legítimas, estándares de protección a la inversión, poder regulatorio

Resumen

En este trabajo se analiza cómo el arbitraje de inversiones afecta la soberanía estatal, al permitir a los inversionistas extranjeros cuestionar las regulaciones nacionales. Se señala que este sistema ha generado incertidumbre y falta de legitimidad debido a la ausencia de normas claras y a la parcialidad de algunos árbitros. Además, se critica la doctrina de las expectativas legítimas, puesto que limita la capacidad regulatoria de los Estados. Como solución, se propone una mayor transparencia en el sistema y el establecimiento de una Corte Multilateral de Inversiones, junto con el fortalecimiento del Estado de derecho, para atraer inversiones sin comprometer la autonomía estatal.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Felipe Andrés Cristancho Escobar, Universidad de Miskolc

Candidato a doctor en Derecho y Ciencias Políticas de la Universidad de Miskolc (Hungría). Actualmente es estudiante de doctorado de tiempo completo, financiado con la beca Stipendium Hungaricum, otorgada por la Tempus Public Foundation de Hungría. Abogado y magíster en Derecho de la Universidad de Antioquia (Colombia). Ha sido docente de la Universidad de Antioquia y la Universidad Eafit.

Referencias

American Manufacturing & Trading, Inc. (amt) (USA) v. Republic of Zaire, ICSID Case n.o arb/93/1, Award (21 de febrero de 1997). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/76

Ansari, A. y Raisi, L. (2018). International standards of investment in international arbitration procedure and investment treaties. Revista Juridicas, 15(2), 11-35. https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/3151

Ariz, E. F. (2021). Does the lack of binding precedent in international arbitration affect transparency in arbitral proceedings? University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 29(1), 47-94. https://repository.law.miami.edu/umiclr/vol29/iss1/10/

Barbosa, J. D. y Galarza, W. (2007). Arbitraje internacional en materia de impuestos: la clausula de excepcion de tributacion Occidental Exploration and Production Company c. Republica del Ecuador (London Court of International Arbitration Administered Case n.o UN.3467). International Law: Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional, 5(9), 493-503. https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/internationallaw/article/view/13992

Biggs, J. (2021). The scope of investors’ legitimate expectations under the fet standard in the European renewable energy cases. ICSID Review. Foreign Investment Law Journal, 36(1), 99-128. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siaa047

Biwater Gauff v. The Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case n.o ARB/05/22, Award (24 de julio de 2008). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/157

Chen, R. (2019). Precedent and dialogue in investment treaty arbitration. Harvard International Law Journal, 60(1), 47-94. https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=faculty-publications

CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Republic of Argentina, ICSID Case n.o ARB/01/8, Award (12 de mayo de 2005). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/288

Comision de las Naciones Unidas para el Derecho Mercantil Internacional (CNUDMI). (2020). Possible reform of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS). En Report of Working Group III (Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform) on the work of its resumed thirty-eighth session. https://docs.un.org/en/A/CN.9/1004/add.1

Cristancho, F. (2023a). International investment arbitration and covid-19. En G. Bandi y A. Pogacsas (eds.), Law in times of crisis (pp. 37-51). Pazmany Press. https://jak.ppke.hu/uploads/articles/458015/file/Bandi_Pogacsas_Law_in_times_of_crisis_Jog_valsag_idejen_.pdf

Cristancho, F. (2023b). Legitimate expectations in international investment law: A threshold for the regulatory power of States? En E. Bernikova, D. Pisarcikova y D. Repiscakova (eds.), Law without borders (pp. 341-353). SafarikPress. https://unibook.upjs.sk/img/cms/2023/pravf/pravo-bez-hranic.pdf

Douglas, Z. (2006). Nothing if not critical for investment treaty arbitration: Occidental, Eureko and Methanex. Arbitration International, 22(1), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/22.1.27

Enron Corporation and Ponderosa Assets, L. P. v. Argentine Republic, icsid Case n.o arb/01/3, Award (22 de mayo de 2007). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/401

Franck, S. D. (2005). The legitimacy crisis in investment treaty arbitration: privatizing public international law through inconsistent decisions. Fordham Law Review, 73(4), 1521-1625. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol73/iss4/10/

Franck, S. D. (2007). Empirically evaluating claims about investment treaty arbitration. North Carolina Law Review, 86(1), 1-87. https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol86/iss1/2/

Garcia, J. J. (2022). Indeterminacy, ideology and legitimacy in international investment arbitration: controlling international private networks of legal governance. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 35, 1967-1994. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11196-021-09819-9

Giorgetti, C. (2014). Who decides who decides in international investment arbitration? University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 35(2), 431-486. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jil/vol35/iss2/3/

Giorgetti, C., Ratner, S., Dunoff, J., Hamamoto, S., Nottage, L., Schill, S. W. y Waibel, M. (2021). Independence and impartiality of adjudicators in investment dispute settlement: assessing challenges and reform options. Journal of World Investment & Trade, 21(2-3), 441-474. https://brill.com/view/journals/jwit/21/2-3/article-p441_8.xml

Guzman, A. T. (1997). Why LDCs sign treaties that hurt them: explaining the popularity of bilateral investment treaties. Virginia Journal of International Law, 38, 639-688. https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1116105?ln=en&v=pdf

Henckels, C. (2023). Justifying the protection of legitimate expectations in international investment law: legal certainty and arbitrary conduct. ICSID Review. Foreign Investment Law Journal, 38(2), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siac027

Langford, M., Behn, D. y Hilliren, R. (2017). esil reflection: the ethics and empirics of double hatting. European Society of International Law, 6(1). https://esil-sedi.eu/post_name-118/

Langford, M., Behn, D. y Letourneau, L. (2021). Empirical perspectives on investment arbitration: what do we know? Does it matter? Journal of World Investment & Trade, 21, 188-250.

LG&E Energy Corp., LG&E Capital Corp., and LG&E International, Inc. v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case n.o arb/02/1, Award (25 de julio de 2007). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/621

MTD Equity SDN. BHD. and MTD Chile S. A. v. Republic of Chile, ICSID Case n.o ARB/01/7, Award (25 de mayo de 2003). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/717

Multilateral investment court project (2015). European Commission. https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-and-protection/multilateral-investment-court-project_en

Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. The Republic of Ecuador, LCIA Case n.o UN3467, Award (1 de julio de 2004). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/761

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2004). Fair and equitable treatment standard in international investment law. OECD Working Papers on International Investment 2004/03. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2004/09/fair-and-equitable-treatment-standard-in-international-investment-law_g17a166b/675702255435.pdf

Parkerings-Compagniet A. S. v. Republic of Lithuania, ICSID Case n.o ARB/05/8, Award (11 de septiembre de 2007). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/812

Philip Morris Brands Sarl, Philip Morris Products S. A. and Abal Hermanos S. A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID Case n.o arb/10/7, Award (8 de julio de 2016). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/460

Potesta, M. (2013). Legitimate expectations in investment treaty law: understanding the roots and the limits of a controversial concept. ICSID Review, 28(1), 88-122. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/sis034

Salacuse, J. W. (2015). The law of investment treaties. Oxford International Law Library.

Saluka Investments B. V. v. The Czech Republic, UNCITRAL, Award (17 de marzo de 2006). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/961

Sand, P. (2012). Conflict and conflicts in investment treaty arbitration: ethical standards for counsel. En A. W. Rovine (ed.), Contemporary issues in international arbitration and mediation (pp. 28-49). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Southern Pacific Properties (Middle East) Limited v. Arab Republic of Egypt, icsid Case n.o arb/84/3, Award (20 de mayo de 1992). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/3300

Tecnicas Medioambientales (Tecmed), S. A. v. The United Mexican States, icsid Case n.o arb (af)/00/2, Award (29 de mayo de 2003). Italaw. https://www.italaw.com/cases/1087

Vadi, V. (2021). Crisis, continuity and change in international investment law and arbitration. Michigan Journal of International Law, 42(2), 321-367. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol42/iss2/4/

Vig, Z. (2021). Legitimate expectations in the arbitral practice of green energy cases under the Energy Charter Treaty. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 62(2), 115-130. https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2022.00347

Zeyl, T. (2011). Charting the wrong course: the doctrine of legitimate expectations in investment treaty law. Alberta Law Review, 49(1), 203-235. https://albertalawreview.com/index.php/ALR/article/view/131.