CANADA – EUROPEAN UNION ECONOMIC AND TRADE AGREEMENT CETA : IS IT A PROGRESSIVE STEP IN TERMS OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW?

Year 2019, Volume: 15 Issue: 1, 94 - 117, 01.01.2019

Dikran M. Zenginkuzucu

https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2019149861

Abstract

‘CETA is a modern and progressive agreement’ said the European Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström welcoming the entry into force provisionally of the CETA on 21 September 2017. Beside all other features and distinguishing characteristics, after its full entry into force, one of the most distinctive progress and improvement introduced by CETA in the field of international investment law and practice will be the establishment of a new investment dispute settlement mechanism, especially the constitution of a permanent Investment Court and the very first establishment of an Appellate body. This Article will discuss in historical perspective how and in what extent this mechanism may serve to the aims of the promotion of international common standards and a stable structure in global scale

Keywords

Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement CETA, Investor-State Dispute Settlement ISDS , Minimum International Standards, Permanent Investment Tribunal, Appeal of Investment Arbitration Awards.

KANADA – AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ EKONOMİK VE TİCARİ ANLAŞMASI CETA : ULUSLARARASI YATIRIM HUKUKU BAKIMINDAN İLERİCİ BİR ADIM MI?

Abstract

AB Ticaret Komiseri Cecilia Malmström, CETA’nın 21 Eylül 2017’de geçici yürürlüğe girişini kutlarken ‘CETA modern ve ilerici bir anlaşma’ diyordu. Diğer tüm özellikleri ve ayırt edici niteliklerinin yanı sıra tam olarak yürürlüğe girişinin ardından CETA tarafından uluslararası yatırım hukuku ve uygulamaları alanına getirilen en belirgin ilerleme ve gelişmelerden biri yeni bir yatırım uyuşmazlıkları çözüm mekanizması kurması, özellikle de bu alanda bir daimi yatırım mahkemesinin kuruluşu ve ilk kez bir temyiz makamının oluşturulması olacaktır. Makalede bu gelişmenin tarihsel süreçte küresel bağlamda uluslararası ortak ölçütler ve istikrarlı bir koruma arayışına nasıl ve ne ölçüde hizmet edebileceği tartışılacaktır.

Keywords

Kapsamlı Ekonomik ve Ticari Anlaşma CETA, Yatırımcı-Devlet Uyuşmazlık Çözümü YDUÇ , Asgari Uluslararası Ölçütler, Daimî Yatırım Mahkemesi, Yatırım Hakemlik Kararlarının Temyizi.

References

• AIV. (2015). International investment dispute settlement from ad hoc arbitration to a permanent court. The Hague: AIV.
• Ambrosius, G. & Hubbard, W. H. (1986). A social and economic history of twentieth-century Europe. Cambridge and London: Harvard College.
• Bederman, D. J. (2004). International law in antiquity. 3. Baskı, New York: CUP.
• Broches, A. (1995). Selected essays: World Bank, ICSID and other subjects of public and private international law. Dordecth: Martinus Nijhoff Publishing.
• Diel-Gligor, K. (2017). Towards consistency in international investment jurisprudence: a preliminary ruling system for ICSID arbitration. Dordecth: Martinus Nijhoff Publishing.
• EXPO. (2014). Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions in the EU’s international investment agreements – workshop, 1. Erişim Tarihi: 17.03.2018, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2014/534979/EXPO_STU%282014%29534979%28ANN01%29_EN.pdf
• Franck, S. D. (2005). The legitimacy crisis in investment treaty arbitration: Privatizing public international law through inconsistent decisions. Fordham Law Review, 73(4), 1521-1625.
• Gaillard, F. (1999). Goldman on international commercial law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Henkin, L., Pugh, R. C., Schachter, O. & Smit, H. (1987). International law – cases and materials. 2. Baskı, St. Paul: West.
• ICSID. (2009a). History of the ICSID convention, II-1. Washington DC: ICSID.
• ICSID. (2009b). History of the ICSID convention, II-2. Washington DC: ICSID.
• ICSID. (2018). The ICSID caseload – statistics. 2018-1. Erişim Tarihi: 12.03. 2018, https://icsid. worldbank.org/en/Documents/resources/ICSID%20Web%20Stats%202018-1(English).pdf
• Kaufmann-Kohler, G. (2005). In search of transparency and consistency: ICSID reform proposal. Transnational Dispute Management, 2(5).
• Kryvoi, Y. (2010). International centre for settlement of investment disputes (ICSID). Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
• Legum, B. (2008). Options to establish an appellate mechanism for investment dispute. In K. P. Sauvant (ed.), Appeals mechanism in investment disputes (ss. 231-240). New York: OUP.
• Lévésque, C. (2016). The European Commission proposal for an investment court system. Ontario: CIGI.
• Newcombe, A. & Paradell, L. (2009). Law and practice of investment treaties – standards of treatment. The Hague: Kluwer Law International
• Nygh, P. E. (1999). Autonomy in international contracts. New York: OUP.
• OECD. (2006). Interpretation of the umbrella clause in investment agreements. Paris: OECD.
• Parra, A. R. (2007). The development of the international centre for settlement of investment disputes. ICSID Review-FILJ, 22(1), 55-68.
• Ragoo, S. (2016). Annulment of investment arbitral awards. In B. Legum (ed.), The investment arbitration review (ss. 159-170). London: Law Business Research.
• Schreuer, C. (2001). The ICSID convention – a commentary. New York: CUP.
• Sornarajah, M. (2007). The international law on foreign investment. 2. Baskı, New York: CUP.
• Şanlı, C. (1986). Uluslararası ticari tahkimde esasa uygulanacak hukuk. Ankara: Yargı Yayınevi.
• Theodore, H. & Moran, T. H. (2009). The UN and transnational corporations: From code of conduct to global compact. Transnational Corporations. 18(2), 91-112.
• UNCTAD. (2015). Reforming world investment governance. Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2018, http://unctad.org/ en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2015_en.pdf
• UNCTAD. (2017a). IAA issues note. No: 1. Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2018, http://unctad.org/en/ PublicationsLibrary/diaepcb2017d1_en.pdf
• UNCTAD. (2017b). IAA issues note. No: 2. Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2018, http://unctad.org/en/ PublicationsLibrary/diaepcb2017d3_en.pdf
• Von Glahn, G. (1976). Law among nations. 3.. Baskı, New York: MacMillan.
• Weiss, T. G. (1989). The UN code of conduct for trans–national corporations. In D.P. Forsythe (ed.) The United Nations in the world political economy (ss. 88-97). New York: Palgrave.
• Wolfgand, P., de Kuyper, J.Q. & de Candolle, B. (1995). Arbitration and renegotiation of international investment agreements. Den Haag: Kluwer Law International.
• Zenginkuzucu, D. M. (2012). Devlet ve yabancı yatırımcılar arasındaki uyuşmazlıkların çözümünde uluslararası yatırım uyuşmazlıklarının çözümü merkezi (ICSID)’nin kuruluşu ve işlevi. İstanbul: Legal Yayınları.
• Zenginkuzucu, D. M. (2013). Şemsiye klozların ICSID hakem mahkemesinin yargı yetkisine etkisi. Uluslararası Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi, 1, 165-189.
• Zenginkuzucu, D. M. (2017a). Uluslararası ticaret ve yatırım uyuşmazlıklarının dostane çözümüne ilişkin temel metinler. 2.Baskı, İstanbul: Legal Yayınları.
• Zenginkuzucu, D. M. (2017b). Uluslararası ticaret ve yatırım uyuşmazlıklarının dostane çözümü – kurumlar kurallar süreçler. 2. Baskı, İstanbul: Legal Yayınları.