Research on State Responsibility Issues in the Application of Legitimacy Clauses in Corrupt Situations

Ziyi  Xu

doi:10.54691/e0mfq989

Authors

Ziyi Xu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/e0mfq989

Keywords:

International Investment Arbitration, Corruption, Legality Clauses, Bilateral Investment Treaties, State Responsibility.

Abstract

In international investment arbitration involving corruption, host country often invoke legality clauses, leading tribunals to decline jurisdiction or find the claim inadmissible. This leaves investors solely bearing the adverse consequences. Such an outcome reflects an “Attribution Asymmetry”: tribunals improperly overlook the host country’s own share of liability. Under the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (hereinafter “Articles on State Responsibility”), adopted by the International Law Commission at its fifty-third session in 2001, corruption is attributable to the state and constitutes an internationally wrongful act. Consequently, the host country should bear responsibility jointly with the investor for the corrupt conduct.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Melo Araujo, Billy A: The EU Deep Trade Agenda: Law and Policy (Oxford Academic, England 2016), p.109.

[2] Salini Costruttori S.p.A. v. Kingdom of Morocco, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/4, Decision on jurisdiction, para.46.

[3] Bayindir Insaat Turizm Ticaret Ve Sanayi A.S. v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan (I), ICSID Case No. ARB/03/29, Award, para.109.

[4] Alasdair Ross Anderson and others v. Republic of Costa Rica, ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/07/3, Award, paras 51-61.

[5] Inceysa Vallisoletana SL v Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No ARB/03/26, Award, paras 230–264

[6] Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/3, Award, para. 373.

[7] Llamzon, Aloysius P: State Responsibility for Corruption: The Attribution Asymmetry in International Investment Arbitration (Oxford University Press, England 2014), p. 238-281.

[8] Llamzon, Aloysius P: State Responsibility for Corruption: The Attribution Asymmetry in International Investment Arbitration (Oxford University Press, England 2014), p. 256.

[9] Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Article 4 Conduct of organs of a State, and Article 5 Conduct of persons or entities exercising elements of governmental authority.

[10] Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Article 7 Excess of authority or contravention of instructions.

[11] Roberto Ago, Eighth Report, II ILC Yearbook 3, 27, para. 49 (1979).

[12] Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Fifty-third Session, Chapter IV, State Responsibility, footnote.150.

[13] Higgins, Problems and Process (n 26), citing Estate of Jean-Baptiste Caire (France) v. United Mexican States , VOLUME V P.516-534 (1929).

[14] Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries, 2001, Commentary (3) of Article 12.

[15] Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries, 2001, Commentary (6) of Article 12.

[16] United Nations Convention Against Corroption, Article 16. Bribery of foreign public officials and officials of public international organizations.

[17] United Nations Convention Against Corroption, Article 17. Embezzlement, misappropriation or other diversion of property by a public official.

[18] United Nations Convention Against Corroption, Article 19. Abuse of functions.

[19] Crawford, James, and others (eds): The Law of International Responsibility, (Oxford University Press, England 2010), p.15.