Investment protection and domestic human rights regulation are allegedly contradictory aims. The author examines the tension between these two legitimate aims that becomes evident with so-called stabilization clauses in State Contracts. Stabilization clauses are aimed at “freezing” the legal and economic framework of large investment projects in the according host state. They collide with subsequent domestic regulation for the purpose of implementing higher human rights standards. The author develops practical contractual instruments for the solution of the identified tension in future investment projects making use of the ongoing international debate as well as of a current case study.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Meckenstock: Investment Protection and Human Rights Regulation: Two Aims in a Relationship of Solvable Tension
Cordula A. Meckenstock has published Investment Protection and Human Rights Regulation: Two Aims in a Relationship of Solvable Tension (Nomos 2010). Here's the abstract: