La Tanzanie a promulgué des modifications profondes de la législation régissant les investissements étrangers dans le secteur des ressources naturelles, dans le but de débarrasser le secteur des vestiges des relations « colonialistes ».
Tanzania has enacted significant changes to the legislation governing foreign investment in natural resources with the aim of ridding the sector of the vestiges of “colonial” relationships.
Effective and holistic reform must go beyond procedural matters and cover substantive matters in order to rebalance the system and address recurring concerns that threaten the legitimacy of the ISDS system.
A written submission from Japan published by the ECT secretariat rejected language on the “right to regulate” and changes to the investor-state dispute resolution mechanism.
Tanzania’s reforms show that the claim that African states should regard ISDS mechanism as the preferred method for resolving investment disputes is not only very contested, but that there are legitimate grounds for those contestations.
The hegemon aspirants in international investment law have already, and perhaps unwittingly, revealed their three step manual: Disguise, dismiss, divert.
In recent years, mediation has been actively discussed for the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) regime, particularly as a means of reducing costs and delays.
COVID-19 can increase liability for countries under international investment treaties. Developing countries face imminent challenges under such treaties.