The Manifestation of Fragmentation in International Law within the Context of Investment Law and Potential Remedies for Fragmentation Through Interpretative Approaches

Öz

The consequences of the fragmentation of international law are clearly observable in the domain of international investment law, which is both influenced by and contributes to this fragmentation. The interaction between investment law and other branches of international law, such as human rights and environmental law, has become increasingly essential. This article examines the necessity of integrating and harmonising investment law with other fields of international law with which it interacts most, including human rights, environmental law, and sustainable development. It proposes the effective application of interpretative methods for treaties as a solution to these issues. When provisions are absent in treaties or when there is a need for harmonised interpretation of existing provisions, the interpretation of international treaties plays a significant role in aligning investment law with other areas of international law. Therefore, as potential solutions, this analysis evaluates the principles of systemic harmonisation outlined in Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the evolutionary interpretation that considers changing circumstances, and the effective interpretation in good faith that takes into account the object and purpose of treaties. These interpretative methods are proposed as fundamental tools for addressing fragmentation and aligning the investor-state dispute resolution process with the broader norms of international law.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fragmentation of International Law
• Investment Law
• Interpretation of Treaties
• Environment
• Human Rights
• Sustainable Development

Uluslararası Hukuktaki Parçalanma Olgusunun Yatırım Hukukunda Tezahürü ve Parçalanmaya Yorum Yolu ile Getirilebilecek Çözümler

Öz

Uluslararası hukukun parçalanmasının sonuçları, bu parçalanmaya hem katkıda bulunan hem de bu parçalanma tarafından şekillendirilen uluslararası yatırım hukuku alanında açık bir şekilde görülmektedir. Yatırım hukuku ile insan hakları ve çevre hukuku gibi diğer uluslararası hukuk dalları arasındaki etkileşim giderek daha gerekli hale gelmiştir. Bu makale, yatırım hukukunun, en çok etkileşim içinde olduğu insan hakları, çevre hukuku ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma gibi uluslararası hukukun diğer alanları ile bütünleştirilmesi ve uyumlaştırılması ihtiyacını araştırmakta ve bu sorunlara çözüm olarak antlaşmaların yorumlanmasına ilişkin yöntemlerin etkili uygulamasını önermektedir. Yatırım antlaşmalarında hüküm bulunmadığında veya bulunan hükümlerin bütünleştirici yorumlanması gerektiğinde, uluslararası antlaşmaların yorumu meselesi, yatırım hukukunun diğer uluslararası hukuk alanlarıyla uyumunda önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu nedenlerle, makalede çözüm önerileri olarak sunulan, Viyana Antlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi’nin antlaşmaların yorumunu düzenleyen 31. maddesinin (3). paragrafı (c) bendinde öngörülen sistemik uyumlaştırma ilkesi, değişen koşulları dikkate alan evrimsel yorumlama yöntemi ve antlaşmaların konu ve amacını dikkate alan iyi niyetli bir yorumu öngören etkili yorumlama ilkesi değerlendirilmektedir. Bu yorumlama yöntemleri, bölünmüşlüğü ele almak ve yatırımcı-devlet uyuşmazlık çözüm sürecini daha geniş uluslararası hukuk normları ile uyumlu hale getirmek için temel araçlar olarak önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası Hukukta Parçalanma
• Yatırım Hukuku
• Antlaşmaların Yorumlanması
• Çevre
• İnsan Hakları
• Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma

Kaynakça

1. Aaken AV, ‘Defragmentation of Public International Law Through Interpretation: A Methodological Proposal’ (2009) 16(2) IJGLS 497. google scholar
2. Aaken AV, ‘Fragmentation of International Law: The Case of International Investment Law’, University of St. Gallen Law School Law and Economics Research Paper Series Working Paper No. (2008-1). google scholar
3. Acconci P, ‘The Integration of Non-lnvestment Concerns As An OpportunitY For The Modernization of International Investment Law: Is A Multilateral Approach Desirable?’ in Giorgio Sacerdoti, Pia Acconci, Mara Valenti, and Anna De Luca (eds), General Interests of Host States In International Investment Law, (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2014). google scholar
4. Albayrak BG, Uluslararası Hukukta Bölünme Tartışmaları ve Norm Çatışmaları (Adalet Yayınevi, 2023). google scholar
5. Alvarez JE, ‘The Human Rights Debate in Investment Law’ in Zachary Douglas, Joost Pauwelyn, and Jorge E. Vinuales (eds.), The Founda-tions of International Investment Law: Bringing Theory into Practice, (Oxford UniversitY Press, 2014). google scholar
6. Andenas M, ‘The Centre Reasserting Itself: From Fragmentation to Transformation of International Law’ in M. Derlen and J. Lindholm (eds), Volume in Honor of Par Hallström, (Iustus 2012). google scholar
7. Ascensio H, ‘Article 31 of the Vienna Conventions on te Law of Treaties and International Law’, (2016) 13(2) ICSID 366-387. google scholar
8. Bayındır ÜB, Milletlerarası Andlaşmaların Evrimsel Yorumlanması, İstanbul (Oniki Levha, 2021). google scholar

9. Bogdandy AV, ‘Pluralism, Direct Effect, and the Ultimate Say: On the Relationship Between International and Domestic Constitutional Law’, (2008) IJCL 6(3-4) 397-413. google scholar
10. Boyar O, ‘Anayasal Uyuşmazlıklarda Yorum’, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, (2008). google scholar
11. Chi M, Integrating Sustainable Development in International Investment Law Normative Incompatibility, System Integration and Gover-nance Implications, (Routledge, 2018). google scholar
12. Crawford J, ‘Chance, Order, Change: The Course of International Law’, in 365 Collected Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law, (2013) 21(9) LMNP 205-229. google scholar
13. Djeffal C, ‘An Interpreter’s Guide to Static and Evolutive Interpretations: Solving Intertemporal Problems According to the VCLT’ in Georges Abi-Saab Kenneth Keith Gabrielle Marceau and element Marquet (ed), Evolutionary Interpretation and International Law, (Hart, 2018). google scholar
14. Dolzer R, Ursula Kriebaum and ehristoph Schreuer, Principles of International Investment Laws (3th edn Third Edition, Oxford University Press, 2022). google scholar
15. Dörr O and Schmalenbach K (eds), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, (Springer, 2018). google scholar
16. DupuY PM and Vinuales JE, International Environmental Law (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2015). google scholar
17. DupuY PM, ‘A Doctrinal Debate in The Globalisation Era: On the Fragmentation of International Law’ (2007) l(l) EJLS 25-41. google scholar
18. DupuY PM, ‘EvolutionarY Interpretation of Treaties: Between MemorY and ProphecY’ in Enzo eannizzaro (ed), The Law of Treaties Beyond the Vienna Convention, (Oxford UniversitY Press, 2011). google scholar
19. Fischer-Lescano A and Teubner G, ‘Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal UnitY in the Fragmentation of Global Law’, (2004) 25(4) MJIL 999-1046. google scholar
20. Gardiner R, Treaty Interpretation, 2th, edn Oxford University Press 2017). google scholar
21. Gaukrodger D, ‘OECD Working Papers on International Investment: The Future of Investment Treaties’, Possible Directions, 2021/03, Erişim tarihi: 30 Haziran 2024. google scholar
22. Gazzini T, Interpretation of International Investment Treaties (Hart Publishing, 2016). google scholar
23. Giannakopoulos C and Monga M, ‘HistorY as Interpretative Context in the EvolutionarY Interpretation of FET in International Investment Law’ in Georges Abi-Saab, Kenneth Keith, Gabrielle Marceau and element Marquet, (eds), Evolutionary Interpretation and Inter-national Law, (Hart, 2018). google scholar
24. Gordon K, Pohl J and Bouchard M, ‘Investment TreatY Law, Sustainable Development and Responsible Business eonduct: A Fact Finding SurveY’ (OEeD Working Papers on International Investment, 2014/01). google scholar
25. Gözler K, Hukuka Giriş, (21th edn, Ekin YaYınevi, 2024). google scholar
26. Greenwood e, ‘UnitY and DiversitY in International Law, A Farewell to Fragmentation_ Reassertion and eonvergence’ in Mads Andenas and Eirik Bjorge (eds), Studies on International Courts and Tribunals (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2015) 37-56. google scholar
27. Hafner G, ‘Pros and Cons Ensuing from Fragmentation of International Law’, (2004) MJIL 25(4) 849-864. google scholar
28. Ishikawa T, ‘The Principle of Effecetive Interpretation in The Wold Trade Organization and Investment Arbitration: Difference In Parameters?’ (2015) 8(2), CAAJ 267-298. google scholar
29. Işıktaç Y and Metin S, Hukuk Metodolojisi, (Filiz Kitapevi, 2023). google scholar
30. Jacur FR, ‘The Vattenfall v. GermanY Disputes: Finding a Balance Between EnergY Investments and Public Concerns’ in Y. Levashova, T. LambooY, I. Dekker, (eds), Bridging the Gap between International Investment Law and the Environment, Legal Perspectives on Global Challenges Series (Eleven Legal Publishing, 2015). google scholar
31. Karaoğlu AO, Yabancı Yatırımların Korunmasında Uluslararası Hukukun Rolü (İstanbul, Onikilevha YaYınları, 2019). google scholar
32. KaYa İ, Uluslararası Hukukta Temel Belgeler, Basic Documents in International Law, (5th edn, Seçkin YaYıncılık, 2024). google scholar
33. Klabbers J, ‘Reluctant Grundnormen: Articles 31(3)(c) and 42 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the Fragmentation of International Law’ in Matthew Craven, Malgosia Fitzmaurice and Maria Vogiatzi, (eds), Time, History and International Law (Brill, 2007). google scholar
34. Koskenniemi M, ‘Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law’, Report of Study Group (A/CN.4/L.682) (ILC, StudY Group on Fragmentation, 2006). google scholar
35. Kriebaum U, ‘Human Rights and International Investment Law’ in Pierre-Marie DupuY, Francesco Francioni, and Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann (eds), Human Rights in International Investment Law and Arbitration, (Oxford UniversitY Press 2009). google scholar
36. Kurtz J, ‘Adjudging the Exceptional at International Investment Law: SecuritY, Public Order and Financial Crisis’ (2010) 59(2) ICLQ 325- 371. google scholar
37. Kurtz J, ‘The Shifting Landscape of International Investment Law and Its CommentarY’ AJIL (2012) 106(3) 686-694. google scholar
38. Kurtz J, The WTO and International Investment Law: Converging Systems (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2016). google scholar
39. Liderfalk U, On The Interpretation of Treaties The Modern International Law as Expressed in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Springer, 2007). google scholar
40. Malcom NS, International Law (9th ed. Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2021). google scholar
41. Marisi F, ‘Environmental Interests in Investment Arbitration’ (2020) 51 IALL 237-254. google scholar
42. McLachlan C, ‘The Principle of SYStemic Integration and Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention’, (2005) 54(2) ICLQ 281-314. google scholar
43. Merkouris P, ‘Article 3l(3)(c) VCLT and the Principle of SYStemic Integration - Normative Shadows in Plato’s Cave’, Queen Mary Studies in International Law Series, (Vol. 17, Brill Nijhoff 2019). google scholar
44. Merkouris P, ‘The Principle of SYstemic Integration’, University of Groningen Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 43 (2020). google scholar
45. Miles K, The Origins of International Investment Law: Empire, Environment, and the Safeguarding of Capital (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2013). google scholar
46. Newcombe A and Paradell L, Law and Practice of Investment Treatie Standarts of Treatment, (Kluwer Law, 2019). google scholar
47. Odermatt J, ‘A Farewell to Fragmentation Reassertion And Convergence in International Law’ in Mads Andenas And Eirik Bjorge, (eds) (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2015). google scholar
48. Öktem E, Uluslararası Teamül Hukuku, (Beta YaYınları, 2013). google scholar
49. Peters A, ‘Fragmentation and Constitutionalization’ in Anne Orford and Florian Hoffmann (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law 1011, (Chapter 48, Oxford UniversitY Press, 2016). google scholar
50. Peters A, ‘The Merits of Global Constitutionalism’, (2009) 16(2) IJGLS 397-411. google scholar
51. Peters A, ‘The Refinement of International Law: From Fragmentation to Regime Interaction and Politicization’, (2017) 15(3) IJCLOU, 671-704. google scholar
52. Qian X, Water Disputes in International Arbitration: Reconsidering the Nexus of Investment Protection, Environment, and Human Rights (Kluwer Law International 2020). google scholar
53. Reinisch A, ‘The Rule of Law in International Investment Arbitration’ in Brian Z. Tamanaha (ed), The Rule of Law in International and Comparative Context (BloomsburY Publishing, 2012). google scholar
54. Rosentreter D, ‘Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the Principle of SYstemic Integration in International Investment Law and Arbitration’, (Vol:4, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2015). google scholar
55. Salacuse JW, The Law of Investment Treaties, (3th edn, Oxford UniversitY Press, 2021). google scholar
56. Salacuse JW, The Law of Investment Treaties, (Oxford UniversitY Press, 2015). google scholar
57. Sands P and Commission J, ‘TreatY, Custom and Time: Interpretaion/Application?’ in Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Olufemi Elias, and Panos Merkouris (eds), Treaty Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties: 30 Years On, (Martinus Nijhoff, 2010). google scholar
58. Sands P and Commission J, ‘TreatY, Custom and Time: Interpretaion/Application?’ in Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Olufemi Elias, and Panos Merkouris (eds), Treaty Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties: 30 Years On, (Martinus Nijhoff, 2010). google scholar
59. UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights, Business and Human Rights in International Investment Law, (SpringerLink, 2020). google scholar
60. Valenti M, ‘The Protection of General Interests of Host States In The Application of The Fair And Equitable Treatment Standard’ in Giorgio Sacerdoti, Pia Acconci, Mara Valenti, and Anna De Luca (eds), General Interests of Host States In International Investment Law, (Cambridge UniversitY Press, 2014). google scholar
61. Villiger ME, Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention of Law of Treaties (Brill, 2009). google scholar
62. Wâlde TW, ‘Interpreting Investment Treaties: Experiences and Examples’ in International Investment Law far the 21st Century (online edn, Oxford Academic, 1 Sept. 2009). google scholar
63. Webb P, International Judicial Integration and Fragmentation (Oxford UniversitY Press 2013). google scholar
64. WeeramantrY JR, Treaty Interpretation in Investment Arbitration (Oxford UniversitY Press, 2012). google scholar
65. Zarra G, ‘The Issue of Incoherence in Investment Arbitration: Is There Need for a SYtemic Reform?’ (2018) 17(l) CJIL 137-185. google scholar
66. Argentina - Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear AB-1999-7, WT/DS121/AB/R (1999) google scholar
67. Azurix Corp v Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/12) Award (14 JulY 2006) google scholar
68. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd v United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No ARB/05/22, Award (2008) google scholar
69. Bear Creek Mining Corporation v Republic of Peru (ICSID ARB/14/21) Award (30 November 2017) google scholar
70. Burlington Resources Inc v Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No ARB/08/5, Award (2017) google scholar
71. Case Concerning the Right of Passage over Indian TerritorY (Portugal v India) (PreliminarY Objections) [1957] ICJ Rep 125 google scholar
72. CMS Gas Transmission Co v Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8) Ad hoc Committee Decision (12 MaY 2005) google scholar
73. Daimler Financial Services AG v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/1 google scholar
74. Dispute Regarding Navigational and Related Rights (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) (Judgment) [2009] ICJ Rep 213, 242 google scholar
75. EDF International S.A., SAUR International S.A. and Leon Participaciones Argentinas S.A. v Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/23) Award (11 June 2012) google scholar
76. EuropeAn Communities-Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products, Interim Reports of the Panel, 7 FebruarY 2006, WT/DS291/INTERIM: WT/DS292/INTERIM; WT/DS293/INTERIM. google scholar
77. Gabcîkovo-NagYmaros Project (HungarY/Slovakia) (Judgment) [1997] ICJ Rep 7 google scholar
78. Gabriel Resources Ltd v Gabriel Resources (JerseY) Ltd v Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/31) Award (8 March 2024) google scholar
79. International Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v The United Mexican States (UNCITRAL) Arbitral Award (6 JanuarY 2006) google scholar
80. Japan - Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages AB-1996-2, WT/DS8, 10 & 11/AB/R (1996) google scholar
81. Kasikili v Sedudu Island (Judgment) ICJ Reports (1999) 72, Declaration of Judge Higgins google scholar
82. Korea - Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain DairY Products AB-1999-8, WT/DS98/AB/R (1999) google scholar
83. Klöckner Industrie-Anlagen GmbH and others v United Republic of Cameroon and Societe Camerounaise des Engrais (ICSID Case No. ARB/81/2) Award (21 October 1983) google scholar
84. Marfin Investment Group v The Republic of CYprus (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/27) Award (redacted) (27 JulY 2018) google scholar
85. Perenco Ecuador Ltd v Republic of Ecuador, ICSID Case No ARB/08/6, Award (2019) google scholar
86. Philip Morris Brands Sâri, Philip Morris Products SA and Abal Hermanos SA v Oriental Republic of UruguaY (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7) Award (8 JulY 2016) google scholar
87. Saluka Investments BV (The Netherlands) v Czech Republic, Partial Award, UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, 17 March 2006 google scholar
88. SGS Societe Generale de Surveillance S.A. v Republic of the Philippines (ICSID Case No. ARB/02/6) Award (29 Januaıy 2004) google scholar
89. Suez v The Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/17) Award (9 FebruarY 2010) google scholar
90. TYrer v United Kingdom (Series A no. 26, 1978) 2 EHRR 1 google scholar
91. Urbaser SA and Consorcio de Aguas Bilbao Bizkaia, Bilbao Bizkaia Ur Partzuergoa v The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No ARB/07/26, Award (2016) google scholar
92. Vattenfall AB, Vattenfall Europe AG, Vattenfall Europe Generation AG & Co. KG v Federal Republic of GermanY, ICSID Case No ARB/09/6, Award (2011) google scholar
93. Vattenfall AB, Vattenfall Europe AG, Vattenfall Europe Generation AG & Co. KG v Federal Republic of GermanY, ICSID Case No ARB/12/12, Award (2021) google scholar
94. Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of Romania for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (signed 8 MaY 2009, entered into force 23 November 2011) google scholar
95. Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Romania for the Promotion and Protection of Investments (signed 13 JulY 1995, entered into force 10 JanuarY 1996). google scholar
96. CAPPI, '2021 Model Canada Agreement For The Promotıon And Protection of Investments’ Erişim Tarihi: 28 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
97. CYprus-Greece BİT (1992) Erişim Tarihi 30 Temmuz 2024 google scholar
98. ILO, ‘Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention’, 1989 (No. 169) Erişim Tarihi: 29 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
99. IISD, ‘Model International Investment Agreement for the Promotion of Sustainable Development’ (2004), Erişim Tarihi: 18 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
100. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (adopted 23 MaY 1969, entered into force 27 JanuarY 1980) 1155 UNTS 33. google scholar
101. ILC, ‘Report of the StudY Group of the International Law Commission’ (A/CN.4/L.702) (FiftY-eighth session, 1 May-9 June and 3 Juİy-11 August 2006) Erişim Tarihi: 22 MaYıs 2024. google scholar
102. ILC, ‘Report on Fragmentation, Official Records of the General AssembİY, Fifty-seventh Session, Supplement’ No. 10 (A/57/10), paras. 492-494. (Çevrimiçi) https://iegAi.un.org/iic/documentAtion/engiish/reports/a_57_10.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 23 Aralık 2024. google scholar
103. ILC, ‘Report on the work of its FiftY-eighth Session’ (2006), General AssembİY, Official Records, SixtY-first Session, Supplement No 10 (A/61/10) google scholar
104. UNCTAD, ‘World Investment Report 2024 Investment facilitation and digital government’ (World Investment Report, 2024) google scholar
105. UNCTAD, ‘Investment and Sustainable EnergY’ (World Investment Report, 2023) Erişim Tarihi: 30 Haziran 2024 google scholar
106. UNCTAD, ‘Reforming International Investment Governance’ (Worid Investment Report, 2015) Erişim Tarihi: 8 Temmuz 2024. google scholar
107. CIEL, ‘EC-Biotech:Overwiev and AnalYSİs of the Panel’s Interim Report’ (2006), 49 , Erişim Tarihi: 9 Temmuz 2024. google scholar