This article shows the systematic critics to the international arbitration ICSID system, for instance its asymmetric system in which only investors can sue sovereign states, de economic dependence of the arbitrators towards the investors, the lack of transparency in the procedure: confidentiality of the proofs, hearings and even the award itself. We also criticize the lack of an appeal body and as a consequence the inexistence of binding jurisprudence, which leads to contradictory awards and as a result the dispersion of the investment law.
On the other hand, we explore the criticism to the investor-state dispute settlement system proposed by UNASUR as the lack of independence of the appointed judges by Latin-American states, the fact that the UNASUR would finance the center and the absence of important states in the project, among others. At the end, we reach the conclusion that the creation of a new International Investment Court it’s the most convenient option for Latin America and the investment law.
Iurgium [previously Spain Arbitration Review]