Search results

International investment law governs matters related to transnational investments. The extensive reach of transnational corporations (TNCs) has granted them substantial economic, political and social influence, often intertwining them with public interest issues and implications in human rights violations. This paper aims to explore the profound influence exerted by TNCs in today’s globalized world and its implications for human rights and social responsibility within the framework of international investment law. Particularly, it acknowledges the vulnerability of economically weak South Asian states and cites past instances such as the Bhopal gas tragedy in India and the Rana Plaza disaster in Bangladesh as egregious violations of human rights. Focusing on South Asian bilateral investment treaties (BITs), this paper aims to examine the scope of investors’ social accountability.

This research engages with doctrinal and analytical methods in traversing through primary and secondary sources. It would parse the arbitral tribunals’ jurisprudence for their discussion on the inclusion of social accountability obligations within international investment agreements (IIAs). Further, it engages in a quantitative analysis related to the nature of the social accountability-related obligation of the corporation within South Asian BITs.

The findings reveal a glaring absence of the law on investors’ social accountability and the need for enhanced regulatory mechanisms to address the escalating influence of TNCs on human and social rights. The absence of a robust legal framework, coupled with the asymmetric nature of international investment law, granting investors greater rights and leverage compared to states, exacerbates this challenge. The phenomenon of “regulatory chill” inhibits states from effectively enforcing regulatory measures aimed at protecting human rights and the environment. Furthermore, the broad interpretation of clauses such as “fair and equitable treatment” by investment tribunals often undermines states’ ability to implement measures in the public interest. While international organizations such as the UNCTAD and the UNCITRAL Working Group III are actively discussing reforms to IIAs, the existing guidelines addressing investors’ social accountability are woefully lacking in the content as well as the method of their integration with international human rights law. The findings underscore the imperative for South Asian nations, the subject of this research’s empirical analysis, to adopt a comprehensive approach involving both domestic law reforms to promote corporate social accountability and active pursuit of negotiations for the inclusion of binding social obligations for investors within IIAs.

This research, drawing upon international law developments, offers suggestions for incorporation of social accountability provisions via relevant domestic law reform. The research could be viewed as a prelude for mapping the legal developments in the area of investors’ social accountability within investment agreements, as well as investment contracts, drawing guidance from international law instruments.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no other study analysed the scope of investors’ social accountability in South Asian BITs.

This paper aims to examine the extent to which these reforms address the limitations of Saudi Arabia’s previous investment framework. Long viewed as a hostile environment in which to do business, the Saudi Government has enacted a broad sweep of measures aimed at restoring investor confidence in central aspects of the country’s evolving private law framework.

This paper offers a timely assessment of the raft of foreign investment reforms, both legislative and regulatory, that have been introduced in Saudi Arabia over the last decade.

The paper will proceed by outlining the perceived failings of the old investment regime before going on to reforms.

It will consider the remaining obstacles to the flow of foreign investment in Saudi Arabia in the context of the dual forces that have historically defined the Kingdom’s ambivalent investment law regime.

The Covid-19 pandemic has persisted for almost three years. States have since then enforced laws, policies and measures believed to be the most effective to handle the global pandemic. Along this line, the Indonesian Government opted to implement mandatory vaccination and refusal of which entails monetary penalties. Hence, this study aims to analyze two legal issues that touch upon the realm of International Human Rights Law: first, whether state has the authority to implement the said mandatory vaccine program to those who refuse to be vaccinated, and second, how is the more appropriate legal policy to obligate vaccination but without coercive sanction.

This is a normative legal research that uses a qualitative method with case studies, conceptual, historical and comparative approaches. A descriptive-analytical deduction process was used in analyzing the issue.

The results present, as part of state’s right to regulate, it has the authority to enact mandatory vaccination with monetary penalties to fulfil its obligation to protect public health in times of emergency; this is legal and constitutional but only if it satisfies the requirements under the International Human Rights Law: public health necessity, reasonableness, proportionality and harm avoidance. Alternatively, herd immunity is achievable without deploying unnecessary coercive sanctions, such as improving public channels of communication and information, adopting legal policies that incentivize people’s compliance like exclusion from public services, subsidies revocation, employment restrictions, higher health insurance premiums, etc.

This study analyzes in depth the following issues: of whether the government has the authority to apply mandatory vaccination laws enforced through monetary penalties for those who refused to be vaccinated and how does the government implement the appropriate legal policy to enforce mandatory vaccination without imposing penalties for non-compliance while maintaining a balance between the interests of protecting public health and the human rights of individuals to choose medical treatment for themselves, including whether they are willing to be vaccinated. Hence, the political affairs, economic matters and other non-legal related issues are excluded from this study.

This paper hence offers a suggestive insight for state in formulating a policy relating to the mandatory vaccination program. Although the monetary penalties do not directly violate the rule of law, a more non-coercive approach to the society would be more favorable.

This study aims to examine the role of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) in attracting higher foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into the major emerging economies namely Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) from the source developed, developing and other emerging economies over a period of 18 years from 2001 to 2018.

To estimate the results, panel data regression on a gravity-knowledge capital model has been used. To account for the problem of endogeneity we have used the two-step difference Generalised Method of Moments estimator proposed by Arellano and Bond (1991).

We find that contradictory to theory and expectations, BITs result in a fall in FDI inflows in BRICS economies. BITs ratified by BRICS economies are not able to provide a sound and secure investment environment to foreign investors, thereby discouraging FDI in these economies.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to examine the impact of BITs on FDI inflows into the emerging BRICS economies. Further, the impact of BITs on FDI flows among developed nations, i.e. north-north FDI and from developed to developing countries, i.e. north-south FDI has already been studied by many researchers. But so far, no study has examined this impact on FDI among developing and emerging economies (south-south FDI), despite an increase in FDI flows among these economies. Therefore, this study seeks to overcome the limitations of previous studies and tries to find out the impact of BITs on FDI inflows in BRICS economies not only from source developed but also from source developing and other emerging economies.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the modalities for the curtailment of expropriation of investment in the course of implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Agreement and to ensure that the African capital markets contribute robustly to economic growth.

The paper relies on the doctrinal approach to assess the state of play and the prospects for the future.

The paper found that African capital markets are fragmented and continue to suffer from poor investor protection which lowers market confidence.

The paper offers new insights on the regulatory approaches to foster investor protection in light of the emergence of the AfCFTA, regulation of executive compensation and need for harmonization of best practices across African markets.

This study examines whether and how the legal origin of foreign institutional investors (FIIs) impacts corporate investment efficiency.

The study employs a large panel dataset of firms from 32 non-USA countries from 2005 to 2018. Financial and institutional ownership data are obtained from the COMPUSTAT Global and Public Ownership databases in S&P Capital IQ, respectively. The study employed ordinary least squares (OLS) regression with year and firm fixed effects. In addition, two-stage least squares with instrumental variable regression (2SLS-IV) and propensity score matching (PSM) approaches were employed to address the potential endogeneity.

The findings of this study suggest that common- and civil-law FIIs differ in their monitoring capabilities to promote investment efficiency. The authors find evidence that increased equity ownership by common-law FIIs, not civil-law investors, strengthens the investment-Q sensitivity, resulting in higher investment efficiency. Consistent with the monitoring and information channel, the results further indicate that the positive impact of common-law FIIs on investment efficiency is stronger in host environments susceptible to agency conflicts and information asymmetry.

This study offers novel evidence on the heterogeneous monitoring role of FIIs with regard to their home countries' legal origins and their impact on investment efficiency in an international context.

Critical examination of Bangladeshi laws related to workers’ rights in the garment industry. This paper aims to examine the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on the protection of garment workers’ rights in Bangladesh, analyzing how international investment practices influence labor standards and the overall well-being of workers in the garment industry.

In this study, qualitative and analytical methods has been used to analyze legal frameworks related to labor rights in Bangladesh and BITs.

The findings indicate a need to strengthen the current legal framework to better protect workers' rights in Bangladesh. The study also provides recommendations for the relevant authorities to improve the existing laws.

Novel idea critically evaluating the Bangladeshi legal framework in the context of foreign direct investment and implications for worker's rights.