It is no secret that international law has been under strain in recent years given the global rise of populism, authoritarianism, protectionist policies, and states’ strategic retreat from multilateral institutions, including, notably, various international dispute settlement (IDS) mechanisms. This trend includes states withdrawing from international tribunals 1 and from provisions on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in recent international investment agreements (IIAs) or from treaties altogether. 2 The withdrawal from such mechanisms, which some publicists dubbed an “assault on international adjudication,” has reinforced the fundamental assumption that the international legal order’s success remains inextricably tied to states’ submission of their international disputes to adjudication or other peaceful dispute settlement mechanisms. 3
Proulx et al. (Fri,) studied this question.