{"title":"国际投资法中的私人行为者、公共产品和水权责任:Urbaser诉阿根廷案分析","authors":"Edward Guntrip","doi":"10.1163/23527072-00101004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International investment law balances public and private interests within the broader framework of international law. Consequently, when water supply services, which constitute a public good, are privatized and operated by foreign investors, questions arise regarding whether foreign investors could be held responsible for the right to water under international law. This article considers how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina allocated responsibility for compliance with the right to water between the host State and the foreign investor when resolving a dispute over privatized water services. It highlights how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina supports different understandings of public and private based on whether the human rights obligation is framed in terms of the duty to respect or protect. The article argues that the tribunal’s rationale overcomplicates the process of allocating responsibility for violations of the human right to water when water supply services have been privatized.","PeriodicalId":313746,"journal":{"name":"Brill Open Law","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Private Actors, Public Goods and Responsibility for the Right to Water in International Investment Law: An Analysis of Urbaser v. Argentina\",\"authors\":\"Edward Guntrip\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/23527072-00101004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"International investment law balances public and private interests within the broader framework of international law. Consequently, when water supply services, which constitute a public good, are privatized and operated by foreign investors, questions arise regarding whether foreign investors could be held responsible for the right to water under international law. This article considers how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina allocated responsibility for compliance with the right to water between the host State and the foreign investor when resolving a dispute over privatized water services. It highlights how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina supports different understandings of public and private based on whether the human rights obligation is framed in terms of the duty to respect or protect. The article argues that the tribunal’s rationale overcomplicates the process of allocating responsibility for violations of the human right to water when water supply services have been privatized.\",\"PeriodicalId\":313746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brill Open Law\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brill Open Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/23527072-00101004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brill Open Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/23527072-00101004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Private Actors, Public Goods and Responsibility for the Right to Water in International Investment Law: An Analysis of Urbaser v. Argentina
International investment law balances public and private interests within the broader framework of international law. Consequently, when water supply services, which constitute a public good, are privatized and operated by foreign investors, questions arise regarding whether foreign investors could be held responsible for the right to water under international law. This article considers how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina allocated responsibility for compliance with the right to water between the host State and the foreign investor when resolving a dispute over privatized water services. It highlights how the tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina supports different understandings of public and private based on whether the human rights obligation is framed in terms of the duty to respect or protect. The article argues that the tribunal’s rationale overcomplicates the process of allocating responsibility for violations of the human right to water when water supply services have been privatized.