This book addresses concerns with the international trade and investment
dispute settlement systems from a statist perspective, at a time when
multilateralism is deeply questioned by the forces of mega-regionalism
and political and economic contestation. In covering recent case law and
theoretical discussions, the book's contributors analyze the
particularities of statehood and the limitations of the dispute
settlement systems to judge sovereign actors as autonomous regulators.
From a democratic deficit coupled with a deficit of legitimacy in
relation to the questionable professionalism, independence and
impartiality of adjudicators to the lack of consistency of decisions
challenging essential public policies, trade and investment disputes
have proven controversial. These challenges call for a rethinking of
why, how and what for, are States judged. Based on a "sovereignty
modern" approach, which takes into account the latest evolutions of a
globalized trade and investment law struggling to put people's
expectations at its core, the book provides a comprehensive framework
and truly original perspective linking the various facets of "judicial
activity" to the specific yet encompassing character of international
law and the rule of law in international society. In doing so, it covers
a large variety of issues such as global judicial capacity building and
judicial professionalism from an international and domestic comparative
angle, trade liberalisation and States' legitimate rights and
expectations to protect societal values, the legal challenges of being a
State claimant, the uses and misuses of imported legal concepts and
principles in multidisciplinary adjudications and, lastly, the need to
reunify international law on a (human) rights based approach.
