Investment Treaty Claims and Post-Conflict Justice

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the post-conflict period and critically assesses how investment treaty claims can interfere with the transition to peace. It questions the role of investment treaties as a facilitator of peace as well as the position that investor−state arbitration is an optimal structure for remedying conflict-related losses. Based on the assumption that large compensation awards may adversely affect the host state’s post-conflict transition, it examines different methods for adjusting post-conflict compensation modalities in light of the transitional circumstances. It further compares investor−state arbitration to other regimes for remedying conflict-related losses, and argues that in some cases, the re-emergence of state control in a dispute resolution process could be justified.