Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
3.2 Multilateral Investment Protection
As mentioned above, the ICSID Convention offers the best investment arbitration
platform within international law, this does not completely answer the question of
the best suited investment protection framework. Besides the already discussed
BITs, there are also multilateral investment frameworks. The most important
multilateral and regional treaties are the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and treaties
within the World Trade Organization (WTO).
3.2.1 Energy Charter Treaty
Comparable to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the ECT is a
regional investment protection agreement and thus different from BITs.
29
Different
from NAFTA, the ECT is limited in its
ratione materiae
, which sometimes leads to
the description of a sectoral agreement.
30
It must be kept in mind that the ECT is
only a declaration of intent, which sets out
and only the
agreements of the signatory states to go beyond this status to negotiate a legal
framework led to an investment protection in 1994 by creating the binding ECT.
31
The idea of the ECT dates back to the collapse of the Soviet Union as there was a
desire to unify Europe (especially the energy sector).
32
The ECT
'
broad policy objectives
'
s intention was to
assist Eastern European states and Russia to develop real economic activity instead
of relying on economic aid.
33
The treaty itself is a multilateral international treaty
which aims to facilitate cooperation in the field of energy.
34
The ECT is a Charta of
basic rights in the field of energy,
35
and it encompasses regulations concerning the
trade of energy, environmental protection, transmission and rules of investment
protection.
36
The ECT mainly protects investments from political risks.
37
The
provisions of the ECT protect all direct or indirect investments of an investor, if
he is a national of an ECT contracting party.
38
Furthermore Western European
'
29
Krajewski (
2009
), 175-176; Schobener et al. (
2010
), 250, Kap. 4
§
17 para 112.
30
Griebel (
2008
), 59.
31
Marauhn (
1996
), 301 (328).
32
Kemper (
2003
), 504 (504); Schobener et al. (
2010
), 251, Kap. 4
§
17 para 115.
33
Marauhn (
1996
), 301 (328).
34
Kemper (
2003
), 504 (505); Krajewski (
2009
), 176; Schobener et al. (
2010
), 251, Kap. 4 §17 para
115.
35
Griebel (
2008
), 59; Happ (
2007
), 129 (129).
36
Sch
obener et al. (
2010
), 252, Kap. 4 §17 paras 116-117; Happ (
2007
), 129 (129); Kemper
(
2003
), 504 (505); cf Krajewski (
2009
), 176; Griebel (
2008
), 59-60; cf Hunter (
2007
), 165 (168);
cf Harten (
2007
), 81-82.
37
Happ (
2007
), 129 (129); Kemper (
2003
), 504 (505).
38
Happ (
2007
), 129 (130).
€
