ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
In solving the trust-shaping problem of the investment dispute settlement mechanism, one must overcome the arbitrator’s dilemma of trust. For a long time, the arbitrator’s independence, representativeness and professionalism have suffered from being questioned, thus a series of international societies covering the code of conduct was gradually launched, and conflict of interest has ruled arbitrator, the selection and appointment mechanism. While the systemic reform to promote the judge’s jurisdiction in harmony with the host country’s regulation rights relationship issues have also appeared in a different reform path. At the bilateral level between China and the EU, the possibility exists for China to accept the EU investment tribunal model, while at the broader bilateral and multilateral levels, China should adopt a balanced stance, that is, to be wary of the risk of over-politicization that may arise from the transfer of the power to appoint arbitrators. Aside from that, China also has to prevent the abuse of regulatory power in the process of harmonizing adjudicative and regulatory powers and may consider adopting a mandatory roster system of arbitrators led by an independent third-party body and a system for the selection of members of the appellate body.
Schreuer, C. (2015). Do we need investment arbitration?. In C. Schreuer (Eds.), Reshaping the investor-state dispute settlement system. (pp. 879-889). Brill Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004291102_040
Paulsson, J. (2010). Moral hazard in international dispute resolution. ICSID review, 25(2), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/25.2.339
Smit, H. (2010). The pernicious institution of the party-appointed arbitrator (No. 33). Columbia FDI Perspectives.
Van Den Berg, A. J. (2011). Dissenting opinions by party-appointed arbitrators in investment arbitration. In M. H. Arsanjani, J. Cogan, R. Sloane, & S. Wiessner (Eds.), Looking to the future: Essays on international law in honor of W. Michael Reisman (pp. 821-843). Brill Nijhoff.
Chen, L. (2017). Risk, incentive and supervision: The identity conflict of ISDS arbitrator and Its solution. International Business Review, 38(02), 66-76.
http://doi:10.13680/j.cnki.ibr.2017.02.006
Yang, G. H. (2018). On the creation and operation of the WTO Appellate Body. Modern Law Science, 40(02), 147-156. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:XDFX.0.2018-02-010
Puig, S. (2014). Social capital in the arbitration market. European Journal of International Law, 25(2), 387-424. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chu045
Tao, N. Y. (2020). Western-centrism perspective and Chinese perspective in the international rule of law. Law and Social Development, 26(03), 188-206.
http://doi:CNKI:SUN:SFAS.0.2020-03-013
Chu, B. P. (2019). Study on the establishment of the international arbitration cooperation alliance of the Belt & Road Initiative. Modern Law Science, 41(03), 181-194. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:XDFX.0.2019-03-013
Fontoura Costa, J. A. (2011). Comparing WTO panelists and ICSID arbitrators: The creation of international legal fields. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 1(4),
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1832382
Deng, T. T. (2019). EU’s proposal for multilateral investment court: Motivation, feasibility and challenges ahead. Journal of Central South University (Social Sciences), 25(04), 62-72. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:ZLXS.0.2019-04-008
Zhang, G. (2011). On the equity of public interests and investors’ interests in the international investment arbitration. Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law), 29(01), 109-114. http://doi:10.16290/j.cnki.1674-5205.2011.01.019
He, Q. S. (2014). Public policy in the judicial review of international commercial arbitration. Social Sciences in China, (07), 143-163+207-208. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:ZSHK.0.2014-07-008
Brower, C. H. (2017). Politics, reason, and the trajectory of the investor-state dispute settlement. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 49(02), 271-320. : https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol49/iss2/4
Wang, P. (2018). Independence, accountability, and participation: The multilateral reform of international investment arbitration and China’s options. The Journal of International Studies, 39(02), 107-128+5-6. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:GJZY.0.2018-02-005
Che, P. Z. (2019). Counter-globalization or reshaping global rules?. Journal of Political Science and Law, (01), 15-23. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:ZFLC.0.2019-01-002
Roberts, A. (2018). Incremental, systemic, and paradigmatic reform of investor-state arbitration. American Journal of International Law, 112(3), 410-432. http://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2018.69
UNCITRAL. (2021). Working Group III: Investor-state dispute settlement reform. United Nations. https://undocs.org/zh/A/CN.9/WG.III/WP.201
Xu, S., & Chen, X. W. (2020). Research on disclosure rules of third-party funding in international investment arbitration. Journal of International Law, (03), 113-139+159-160. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:GJFX.0.2020-03-007
Shan, W. H., & Wang, P. (2019). Balanced liberalism and China’s position on international investment arbitration reform. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences), 39(05), 20-28. http://doi:10.15896/j.xjtuskxb.201905003
Devaney, J. (2019). An independent panel for the scrutiny of investment arbitrators: An idea whose time has come?. Forthcoming, Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 18, 366-385. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3519208
He, Y. H. (2020). Research on the “joint treaty party control” mechanism of the ISDS. Studies in Law and Business, 37(04), 143-157. http://doi:10.16390/j.cnki.issn1672-0393.2020.04.010
Van Harten, G. (2008). Investment treaty arbitration and public law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552146.001.0001
Puig, S., & Shaffer, G. (2018). Imperfect alternatives: Institutional choice and the reform of investment law. American Journal of International Law, 112(3), 361-409. http://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2018.70
Dong, J. R. (2018). Study on investor-state dispute settlement mechanism under the “Belt and Road” Initiative—a study based on the EU international investment tribunal system. Jiangsu Social Sciences?(01), 173-180. http://doi:10.13858/j.cnki.cn32-1312/c.2018.01.022
Lin, H. L. (2021). The correction of treaty control mechanism to the settlement of international investment disputes from the perspective of rebalancing—review on “the return of the home state to investor-state disputes: Bringing back diplomatic protection?”. Tribune of Political Science and Law, 39(01), 150-160. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:ZFLT.0.2021-01-014
Zhang, C. L., & Kuang, J. (2019). Judicial review on arbitral awards made before the dispute. Chinese Journal of Maritime Law, 30(04), 75-85. http://doi:CNKI:SUN:ZGHS.0.2019-04-008
Brodlija, F. (2021). Back to basics: Drawing the line between disclosure, challenge and disqualification standards in international investment arbitration. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2021/03/01/back-to-basics-drawing-the-line-between-disclosure-challenge-and-disqualification-standards-in-international-investment-arbitration/
Akhavan, P. (2017). The contribution of investment arbitration to the rule of law. In A. Menaker (Eds.), International arbitration and the rule of law: Contribution and conformity (pp. 77-82). Kluwer Law International BV.
Xiao, J. (2017). Jurisdictional issues of regulating conflict decisions in international Investment arbitration (1st ed.). China Social Science Press.
Queen Mary University of London. (2020). QMUL-CCIAG survey: Investors’ perceptions of ISDS. http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/media/arbitration/docs/QM-CCIAG-Survey-ISDS-2020.pdf
Deng, T. T. (2017). Investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms in China-EU bilateral investment treaties—a perspective on the EU investment tribunal system. Political Science and Law, (04), 99-111. http://doi:10.15984/j.cnki.1005-9512.2017.04.008
Lenk, H. (2017). Investment arbitration under EU investment agreements: Is there a role for an autonomous EU legal order?. European Business Law Review, 28(2), 135-162. https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2017011
Qin, X. J. (2021). The choice of pathways to establish an appellate mechanism of the investment arbitration. Political Science and Law, (02), 126-138.
http://doi:10.15984/j.cnki.1005-9512.2021.02.010
In-Text Citation: (Zhang et al., 2023)
To Cite this Article: Zhang, X., Rahman, R. A., & Khan, H. A. (2023). How to Break the Arbitrator’s Trust Dilemma? International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 13(5), 2225 – 2243.
Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non0-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode