International Investment Law Journal
Volume 6, Issue 2, July 2026
Table of Contents
-
- Associate professor Cristina Elena POPA TACHE
Editorial - Tracking the Shifts in International Investment Law or the Dream of Symmetry in Investment LiabilityAbstract:If I were to identify a common thread running through the articles in this issue of the International Investment Law Journal, the concept of symmetry in investment liability would seem the most appropriate. Investment law is currently undergoing a phase in which capital protection is increasingly coming into conflict with states’ climate obligations, the use of artificial intelligence in economic decision-making, ISDS reform, the diversity of arbitrators, the legal governance of the digital economy, and the enforcement of arbitral awards against states. The topicality of this subject stems from the convergence of recent developments, such as the publication of the World Investment Report 2026, the fifty-ninth session of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in March 2026 concerning the registration of arbitral awards rendered under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, the United Nations General Assembly resolution of May 2026 concerning the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion on climate change, and the forthcoming general application of the European Union Regulation on artificial intelligence. The articles in this issue point in the same direction: starting from the legitimacy of investment protection, which is reinforced by linking investors’ rights to public diligence, and leading towards technological accountability, professional pluralism, the quality of public administration and post-arbitration discipline. Through these contributions, this issue links the regulatory transformations of 2026 to a practical agenda for treaties, arbitration, public administration and legal research.
Keywords:international investment law, investment accountability, investor – state arbitration, climate transition, artificial intelligence.
JEL Classification:K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/01
Please cite this article as: Popa Tache, Cristina Elena, ‘Editorial. Tracking the Shifts in International Investment Law or the Dream of Symmetry in Investment Liability’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 88-95.
Page 88 - PhD Federica CRISTANI
Opinion Piece: The Gender Dimension in ISDS Reform: Where Are We?Abstract:This opinion piece examines the gender dimension of the ongoing reform of investor– State dispute settlement (ISDS) and argues that diversity remains insufficiently integrated into the agenda of UNCITRAL Working Group III. While the reform process has addressed independence, impartiality, double-hatting, costs, transparency, and institutional design, gender balance in the appointment of adjudicators has received only limited attention. Drawing on recent ICSID statistics and scholarship concerning diversity and legitimacy, the article shows that the representation of women has improved, particularly where appointments are made by arbitral institutions, whereas party appointments remain dominated by established professional networks. It further considers the potential unintended effects of restrictions on multiple roles, which may reduce conflicts of interest but also narrow entry routes for women and other underrepresented practitioners who combine arbitral work with counsel, academic, or expert functions. The opinion piece also assesses the possible contribution of the UNCITRAL Advisory Centre to broadening candidate pools, strengthening appointment transparency, and supporting States with limited ISDS capacity. It concludes that gender diversity should be treated not as a symbolic objective, but as a component of the sociological and institutional legitimacy of the reformed ISDS system, alongside independence, impartiality, and procedural efficiency.
Keywords: Investor-State Dispute Settlement; ISDS reform; gender diversity; arbitrator appointments; UNCITRAL Working Group III.
JEL Classification: K22, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/02
Please cite this article as:
Cristani, Federica ‘Opinion Piece: The Gender Dimension in ISDS Reform: Where Are We?’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 96-104.
Page 96 - Lawyer Abbas Onoja OCHOGWU
The Algorithmic Investor and the Accountability Gap: Reimagining State Responsibility and Investment Protection in the Age of Artificial IntelligenceAbstract:The rapid integration of artificial intelligence into global financial markets is transforming the nature of cross-border investment in ways that existing international investment law has yet to adequately address. Contemporary investment treaties were negotiated on the assumption that investment decisions are made by natural persons or corporations acting through identifiable human agents. Increasingly, however, investment strategies, capital allocation decisions, portfolio management functions and market responses are being generated or substantially influenced by autonomous algorithmic systems capable of operating with limited human intervention. This development raises profound questions regarding legal responsibility, regulatory authority and treaty protection within the international investment regime. This article examines the emerging phenomenon of algorithm-driven foreign investment and argues that it exposes a significant accountability gap in contemporary international investment law. Existing doctrines governing investor protection, state responsibility and investor-state dispute settlement remain largely premised upon human agency and are therefore ill-equipped to address disputes arising from autonomous or semi-autonomous investment conduct. The article analyses the challenges that artificial intelligence poses to traditional principles of attribution, causation, foreseeability and liability under international law. It further evaluates whether existing treaty frameworks can effectively accommodate investment decisions generated through artificial intelligence without undermining either regulatory sovereignty or legitimate investor expectations. Drawing upon international investment jurisprudence, principles of state responsibility, emerging artificial intelligence governance frameworks and comparative regulatory developments, the article proposes a responsibility-based framework capable of addressing the legal complexities created by algorithmic investment. It concludes that meaningful reform of international investment law is necessary to preserve both accountability and legitimacy in an increasingly automated global investment environment.
Keywords: artificial intelligence; international investment law; state responsibility; investor-state dispute settlement; algorithmic investment; investment treaties.
JEL Classification: K22, K24, K33
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/03
Please cite this article as:
Ochogwu, Abbas Onoja ‘The Algorithmic Investor and the Accountability Gap: Reimagining State Responsibility and Investment Protection in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 105-122.
Page 105 - LL.M Student Alexis YEZOULAYOM DAILA
State Sovereign Immunity in the Enforcement of Investor-State Arbitral AwardsAbstract:This paper examines how sovereign immunity, especially immunity from execution, affects the enforcement of investor-State arbitral award. Its objective is to evaluate whether the current legal framework finds an adequate balance between award finality and sovereign immunity. We have used a doctrinal and comparative methodology. The research analyzes international legal instruments and domestic enforcement regimes in the United Kingdom, the United States and France. The results show that although States generally waive jurisdictional immunity by consenting to arbitration, they routinely rely on execution immunity to resist postaward enforcement. Both ICSID and New York Convention regimes ultimately defer to the law of the forum State, therefore producing significant jurisdictional divergence. The study points out that gap between legal recognition and actual enforcement undermines the predictability of investment arbitration. The study implies that a more coherent approach to execution immunity either through clearer treaty practice or harmonized domestic rules, is necessary to strengthen the credibility of the system.
Keywords: State immunity; immunity from jurisdiction; immunity from execution; investor–State arbitration; ICSID Convention; New York Convention.
JEL Classification: K33, K41
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/04
Please cite this article as:
Yezoulayom Daila, Alexis ‘State Sovereign Immunity in the Enforcement of Investor-State Arbitral Awards’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 123-137.
Page 123 -
PhD Ho Tran HUNG; Associate professor Ong Van NAM; Lecturer Tran Thi Bich NGA
Law-Based Economic Governance and the Investment Climate in Viet Nam’s Digital Market Economy: A Comparative Regulatory-Governance ApproachAbstract:This article examines state management of the economy by law in Viet Nam under the combined pressures of market deepening, private-sector development and digital transformation. Its central claim is that economic management by law should not be reduced to the multiplication of administrative rules. Properly understood, it is a constitutional and regulatory method through which public power is authorised, limited, reasoned, proportionate and reviewable. The article uses doctrinal legal analysis, comparative regulatory theory and public-policy reasoning. It compares Viet Nam’s legal-institutional framework with selected international standards on regulatory quality, impact assessment, agile regulation and digital governance. It argues that a modern socialist-oriented market economy requires a shift from permission-based administrative steering to an economic legality cycle: legal mandate, evidence-based rule-making, proportional intervention, transparent implementation, data accountability and effective remedies. The article proposes reforms in law-making, business regulation, digital public administration and regulatory impact assessment so that state economic management can better protect property rights, freedom of enterprise, fair competition, social justice and human dignity.
Keywords: economic governance; rule of law; regulatory governance; digital economy; Viet Nam; international investment law.
JEL Classification: K20, K23, K40, H11, O38
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/05
Please cite this article as:
Hung, Ho Tran, Ong Van Nam & Tran Thi Bich Nga ‘Law-Based Economic Governance and the Investment Climate in Viet Nam’s Digital Market Economy: A Comparative Regulatory- Governance Approach’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 138- 153.
Page 138 - PhD Candidate Haniehalsadat ABOUTORABIFARD
The ICJ-ISDS Climate Paradox: Reconciling Climate Change Obligations with Investor ProtectionAbstract:The article is developed with the aim of examining the tensions between States’ obligations concerning climate change, as consolidated by the 2025 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, and the mechanisms for the protection of foreign investors within investor – State dispute settlement (ISDS). Although international law imposes on States obligations of due diligence, prevention of significant harm, and effective regulation of private actors, measures adopted to fulfil these obligations may generate investment claims and risks of compensation, producing a chilling effect on climate regulation. This contradiction is analysed through the lens of the sole effects doctrine, the regulatory powers doctrine, and the investment reprisal approach, drawing on relevant case law, including Metalclad, Azurix, and Copper Mesa. It is argued that the problem derives from the asymmetry between the State-centric character of the international climate regime and the investor-protection orientation of ISDS. As a solution, the study proposes the progressive recognition of direct international climate obligations for private investors. By linking the “polluter pays” principle with the reasoning of the arbitral tribunal in Urbaser v. Argentina, the article identifies a doctrinal basis for incorporating investors’ climate-related conduct into investment arbitration. This solution offers a potential avenue for achieving greater coherence between investment protection, climate responsibility, and States’ capacity to adopt measures necessary to protect the climate system.
Keywords: climate change, International Court of Justice (ICJ), investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), international investment law, climate obligations, due diligence, “polluter pays” principle, Urbaser v. Argentina.
JEL Classification: K22, K33, K40
DOI: 10.62768/IILJ/2026/6/2/06
Please cite this article as:
Aboutorabifard, Haniehalsadat ‘The ICJ-ISDS Climate Paradox: Reconciling Climate Change Obligations with Investor Protection’, International Investment Law Journal 6, issue 2 (July 2026): 154-177.
Page 154
