The ICSID system is it broken or it has to be reformed

AuthorGloria Milena Torres Rojas
PositionLaw School Xiamen University. MB Politics and International Relations
Pages56-67
Vol. 3 No. 1
January, 2019
European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences
IIPCCL Publishing, Graz-Austria
ISSN 2519-1284
Acces online at www.iipccl.org
56
The ICSID system is it broken or it has to be reformed
PhD (C.) Gloria Milena Torres Rojas
Law School Xiamen University. MB Politics and International Relations
Abstract
Since ICSID was established in 1966, this institution have received both praises and critics.
Critics point out that there is bias in favor of investors, that ICSID was established in the interest
of wealthy countries, its links with the World Bank Group, the disregard of environmental
issues and the lack of an appellate mechanism. Taking into consideration those remarks, the
purpose of this article is to assess whether or not the ICSID system is broken or if only needs
to be reformed. The thesis that defends this article is that ICSID is not broken at all, the system
needs only some reforms that need to be implemented so that it can continue its mission of
being a forum of dispute resolution.
Keywords: ICSID, dispute resolution, advantages, enforceability awards, neutrality,
transparency.
Introduction
Since ICSID was established in 1966, this institution has been devoted to international
investment dispute se lement. The ICSID Convention is a multilateral treaty formulated
by the Executive Directors of the World Bank to further the Bank’s objective of promoting
international investment (ICSID, 2017).
ICSID has received both praises and critics. The hypothesis of this paper is that the
ICSID system is not broken as many have stated, the system needs only some reforms
that need to be carried out so that it can continue its mission of being a forum of
dispute resolution. The purpose of this article is to evaluate whether or not the critics
made to ICSID are well grounded and to examine if ICSID is broken or not and if it
needs to be reformed.
In spite of some shortcomings such as the lack of an appellate system and the
disregards of environmental issues. The system o ers more advantages than
disadvantages because of the enforceability of its awards, it avoids national courts,
and ICSID is a depoliticized institution which is independent, autonomous, as well
as transparent, f‌l exible, e cient and neutral.
This paper is structured like this in the f‌i rst part, It will address the critics that some
authors had made to ICSID. In the second part I will assess whether or not those
critics to ICSID make sense or are consistent. On the third part, I will expose ICSID
advantages and f‌i nally some conclusions will be made.
1. Critics to ICSID
First of all, various authors such as Van Harten claim that there is a bias in favor of the
investors. He argues that this is due to the arbitrator’s lack of tenure, which makes them
dependent on prospective claims. Van Harten also states that arbitration lacks in accountability,

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT