Congress: Don't dismiss neutral dispute settlement for US investors

Congress: Don't dismiss neutral dispute settlement for US investors

April 22, 2015, The Hill

Covington's Marney Cheek and John Veroneau wrote this article on Investor-state dispute settlement:

"Recent calls by anti-trade groups to abandon investor-state arbitration (often referred to as “investor-state dispute settlement,” or ISDS) ignore the modern reality of the global economy and conjure images of Chicken Little’s warnings that the sky is falling. Investment flows exceeded $1.45 trillion globally in 2013. Of the billions of dollars in cross-border investments in place today, only a few hundred investment disputes have been filed based on treaties that allow investors to bring claims against states, for, among other things, monetary damages when their property has been taken by a foreign government without compensation. Rather than leaving wronged Americans to rely solely on the U.S. State Department or foreign courts, the U.S. should stand behind its 21st Century investor-state dispute settlement regime. Why? It depoliticizes disputes, is increasingly transparent and provides foreign investors -- and states -- with a fair system for adjudicating disputes when they arise."