2015•Mizan Law ReviewOpen access

Rethinking Ethiopia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties in light of Recent Developments in International Investment Arbitration

MB Hailu, TE Kassahun

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

International investment law is dynamic. As treaty practice and jurisprudence in the area constantly develop, global standards are always in the making. Rethinking Ethiopia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) is thus a natural response to evaluate the status of the country’s obligations under the regime of global investment standards. This article briefly evaluates the concept of Most Favored Nation (MFN) treatment, in relation to the nature or purpose of MFN clauses and its interaction with dispute resolution provisions contained in BITs. In doing so, the article evaluates the different scenarios of ‘treaty shopping’ whereby an investor can possibly use BITs signed by Ethiopia and a state other than the investor’s home state, to benefit from treaty obligations entered by Ethiopia with other partners. A review of Ethiopian BITs indicate that in almost all of the BITs, the MFN clause is phrased in general terms and leaves leverageto raise competing interpretations and creating a matrix of obligations thereby stretching the country’s obligations under the respective agreements. This calls for revising the broad and incoherent application of the MFN standard contained in various BITs signed by Ethiopia with the aim to laying down a coherent investment treaty framework.Key words: Most Favored Nation, Bilateral Investment Treaties, InvestmentArbitration, Umbrella Clause, Standard of Treatment

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

International investment law is dynamic. As treaty practice and jurisprudence in the area constantly develop, global standards are always in the making. Rethinking Ethiopia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) is thus a natural response to evaluate the status of the country’s obligations under the regime of global investment standards. This article briefly evaluates the concept of Most Favored Nation (MFN) treatment, in relation to the nature or purpose of MFN clauses and its interaction with dispute resolution provisions contained in BITs. In doing so, the article evaluates the different scenarios of ‘treaty shopping’ whereby an investor can possibly use BITs signed by Ethiopia and a state other than the investor’s home state, to benefit from treaty obligations entered by Ethiopia with other partners. A review of Ethiopian BITs indicate that in almost all of the BITs, the MFN clause is phrased in general terms and leaves leverageto raise competing interpretations and creating a matrix of obligations thereby stretching the country’s obligations under the respective agreements. This calls for revising the broad and incoherent application of the MFN standard contained in various BITs signed by Ethiopia with the aim to laying down a coherent investment treaty framework.Key words: Most Favored Nation, Bilateral Investment Treaties, InvestmentArbitration, Umbrella Clause, Standard of Treatment

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

International investment law is dynamic. As treaty practice and jurisprudence in the area constantly develop, global standards are always in the making. Rethinking Ethiopia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) is thus a natural response to evaluate the status of the country’s obligations under the regime of global investment standards. This article briefly evaluates the concept of Most Favored Nation (MFN) treatment, in relation to the nature or purpose of MFN clauses and its interaction with dispute resolution provisions contained in BITs. In doing so, the article evaluates the different scenarios of ‘treaty shopping’ whereby an investor can possibly use BITs signed by Ethiopia and a state other than the investor’s home state, to benefit from treaty obligations entered by Ethiopia with other partners. A review of Ethiopian BITs indicate that in almost all of the BITs, the MFN clause is phrased in general terms and leaves leverageto raise competing interpretations and creating a matrix of obligations thereby stretching the country’s obligations under the respective agreements. This calls for revising the broad and incoherent application of the MFN standard contained in various BITs signed by Ethiopia with the aim to laying down a coherent investment treaty framework.Key words: Most Favored Nation, Bilateral Investment Treaties, InvestmentArbitration, Umbrella Clause, Standard of Treatment

Key concepts: Treaty, Arbitration, Investment (military), Jurisprudence, Bilateral investment treaty, Investment protection, Law, State (computer science)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Rethinking Ethiopia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties in light of Recent Developments in International Investment Arbitration — Research Paper | ScholarLens