Administrative Review Provisions in Chinese Investment Treaties: ‘Gilding the Lily’?

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Journal of International Dispute Settlement Pub Date : 2021-01-05 DOI:10.1093/JNLIDS/IDAA025
M. Chi, Zongyao Li
{"title":"Administrative Review Provisions in Chinese Investment Treaties: ‘Gilding the Lily’?","authors":"M. Chi, Zongyao Li","doi":"10.1093/JNLIDS/IDAA025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Despite the popularization of investor-state arbitration (ISA), administrative review remains a helpful local remedy for investment-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in some states. China has a complicated and comprehensive legal system of administrative review. It has concluded a large number of international investment agreements (IIAs), and nearly half of them contain an administrative review provision. These provisions could be considered as an expropriation review mechanism, a standalone ISDS option, an ISA supporting measure or a pre-ISA requirement. Given that administrative review has legal and practical limits, and that China’s national law on dispute settlement and foreign investment governance keeps changing, the attractiveness and significance of administrative review for ISDS are diminishing. In China’s recent IIA-making, there appears an emerging trend of abandoning administrative review. In the long run, it remains to be seen how China will balance local remedies and ISA in IIA-making and foreign investment governance in the future.","PeriodicalId":44660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","volume":"109 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JNLIDS/IDAA025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Despite the popularization of investor-state arbitration (ISA), administrative review remains a helpful local remedy for investment-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in some states. China has a complicated and comprehensive legal system of administrative review. It has concluded a large number of international investment agreements (IIAs), and nearly half of them contain an administrative review provision. These provisions could be considered as an expropriation review mechanism, a standalone ISDS option, an ISA supporting measure or a pre-ISA requirement. Given that administrative review has legal and practical limits, and that China’s national law on dispute settlement and foreign investment governance keeps changing, the attractiveness and significance of administrative review for ISDS are diminishing. In China’s recent IIA-making, there appears an emerging trend of abandoning administrative review. In the long run, it remains to be seen how China will balance local remedies and ISA in IIA-making and foreign investment governance in the future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国投资协定中的行政复议规定:“画蛇添脚”?
尽管投资者-国家仲裁(ISA)已经普及,但在一些国家,行政复议仍然是一种有益的投资-国家争端解决(ISDS)的地方救济。中国的行政复议法律制度复杂而全面。中国缔结了大量国际投资协定,其中近一半包含行政审查条款。这些规定可以被视为征收审查机制、独立的ISDS选项、ISA支持措施或ISA前要求。由于行政复议具有法律和实践上的局限性,而且中国关于争端解决和外商投资治理的国家法律不断变化,行政复议对ISDS的吸引力和意义正在减弱。在中国近期的国际投资协定制定中,出现了放弃行政复议的趋势。从长远来看,中国未来在国际投资制定和外资治理中如何平衡本地救济和ISA,仍有待观察。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Unveiling the ‘author’ of international law — The ‘legal effect’ of ICJ’s advisory opinions Continental shelf delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles: Mauritius/Maldives and the forking paths in the jurisprudence The legitimation of international adjudication Reflecting on the rule of law contestations narratives in the world trading system When the Dragon comes Home to Roost: Chinese Investments in the EU, National Security, and Investor–State Arbitration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1