{"id":12627,"date":"2021-03-09T17:23:44","date_gmt":"2021-03-09T16:23:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/?p=12627"},"modified":"2021-03-10T14:54:35","modified_gmt":"2021-03-10T13:54:35","slug":"symposium-on-international-investment-law-and-human-rights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/symposium-on-international-investment-law-and-human-rights\/","title":{"rendered":"Symposium on international investment law and human rights"},"content":{"rendered":"

International investment law and human rights law share an uneasy relationship. Ever since the problematic interaction between the two areas of law entered mainstream discourse over a decade ago<\/u><\/a>,<\/u> the tension could not be resolved.\u00a0If anything the complexity of the relationship has become ever more obvious. In a recent issue<\/u><\/a> the Leiden Journal of International Law\u00a0(LJIL) launched a discussion on some aspects of this relationship with its symposium on \u201cInternational Investment Law and Human Rights\u201d.<\/p>\n

We at V\u00f6lkerrechtsblog are extremely happy to take the debate into the digital realm with our symposium on \u201cInternational Investment Law and Human Rights\u201d in cooperation with the LJIL. The goal of the symposium is to provide space for exchanges on unresolved issues at the interface of international investment law and human rights. Over the course of this week we will feature two exchanges. Each takes as a starting point one particularly thought-provoking article from the LJIL issue. Two scholars, Silvia Steininger and Oliver Hailes,\u00a0respectively comment on LJIL articles by Moshe Hirsch and a collaborative piece by Tomer Broude and Caroline Henckels. The LJIL articles\u2019 authors will then each respond.<\/p>\n

In the first exchange, Silvia Steininger engages with Hirsch\u2019s article \u201cSocial movements, reframing investment relations, and enhancing the application of human rights norms in international investment law<\/u><\/a>\u201c.\u00a0In his LJIL contribution Moshe Hirsch highlights\u00a0the role social movements can play in the development of human rights concerns in international investment law by piercing the classic investor-state frame. Steininger believes that a study of social movements should also take the Global South into account and questions whether the legal strategies to\u00a0increase the application of human rights law suggested by Hirsch can actually bring about fundamental change in investment arbitration. In his reply, Hirsch addresses her concerns, stating that neither social movements, nor any other actor can be the \u201csingle saviour\u201d to transform\u00a0international investment law.<\/p>\n

The second exchange\u00a0focuses on\u00a0\u201cNot all rights are created equal: A loss-gain frame of investor rights and human rights<\/u><\/a>\u201d\u00a0by Tomer Broude and Caroline Henckels. In their article, Broude and Henckels argue that investors\u2019 claims are frequently framed in a language of \u201crights\u201d by practitioners and scholars alike. Human rights on the other hand are understood as \u201caspirational demands\u201d to be realized in the future.\u00a0This understanding places human rights at a \u201cstructural disadvantage\u201d, which the two illuminate using a loss-gain frame that builds on behavioural economics and cognitive psychology.\u00a0For the symposium,\u00a0Broude and Henckels enter into a dialogue with\u00a0Oliver Hailes who\u00a0contends that the loss-gain frame could be escaped by shifting focus onto the states\u2019 duty to regulate.<\/p>\n

Beyond the pieces discussed here, the LJIL symposium includes additional articles worth exploring, by Jean-Michel Marcoux (<\/span>Informal instruments to impose human rights obligations on foreign investors: An emerging practice of legality?<\/a>), Dafina Atanasova (<\/span>Non-economic disciplines still take the back seat: The tale of conflict clauses in investment treaties<\/a>) and Ole Kristian Fauchauld (<\/span>International investment law in support of the right to development?<\/a>). It is based on papers delivered at a workshop on “<\/span>The Legitimate Role for Investment Law and Arbitration in Protecting Human Rights<\/a>” at the University of Oslo in February, 2019, organized by\u00a0<\/span>LEGINVEST\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0<\/span>PluriCourts<\/a>, in collaboration with\u00a0<\/span>Monash University\u00a0<\/a>, the\u00a0<\/span>Minerva Center for Human Rights at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem<\/a> and the <\/span>Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies at\u00a0Leiden University<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

We are grateful for the support of the editors-in-chief of the Leiden Journal of International Law, Ingo Venzke and Eric De Brabandere, and we are looking forward to the discussion!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

International investment law and human rights law share an uneasy relationship. Ever since the problematic interaction between the two areas of law entered mainstream discourse over a decade ago, the tension could not be resolved.\u00a0If anything the complexity of the relationship has become ever more obvious. In a recent issue the Leiden Journal of International […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6639],"tags":[],"authors":[5439,4944],"article-categories":[3572],"doi":[],"class_list":["post-12627","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","authors-fabian-simon-eichberger","authors-isabel-daum","article-categories-symposium"],"acf":{"subline":""},"meta_box":{"doi":"10.17176\/20210310-033631-0"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12627","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12627"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12627\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12650,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12627\/revisions\/12650"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12627"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12627"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12627"},{"taxonomy":"authors","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/authors?post=12627"},{"taxonomy":"article-categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article-categories?post=12627"},{"taxonomy":"doi","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/voelkerrechtsblog.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/doi?post=12627"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}