Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This paper examines the differences between the ICSID Convention and the UNCITRAL mechanism regarding national court involvement in ISDS. While ICSID prohibits recourse to domestic courts and offers annulment mechanisms, UNCITRAL cases may involve federal courts interpreting tribunal decisions without institutional support and court discretion for vacating awards. The paper analyzes the involvement of national courts under ICSID and UNCITRAL, discusses the debate on rebalancing between states and foreign investors, and provides suggestions for reforming the ICSID. It also highlights challenges in enforcing arbitration awards and the potential risks of politicization in ISDS. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for a uniform and consistent approach to ensure legal coherence and effectiveness in ISDS.
Haoxiang Chu (Wed,) studied this question.