India needs to revisit its Model bilateral investment treaty to strike a balance between investment protection and State’s right to regulate, says the author.
Author
Prabhash Ranjan, Professor and Vice Dean, Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India.
Summary
India’s bilateral investment treaty (BIT) programme has undergone a complete overhaul ever since India was sued by multiple foreign investors before various investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals.
India unilaterally terminated all its BITs, adopted a new Model BIT, and is now negotiating new investment treaties with several countries like the European Union and Australia.
Against this background, the parliamentary standing committee on external affairs has made some significant recommendations on India’s approach toward BITs. The parliamentary committee recognises the value of BITs for India to attract foreign investment inflows.
This paper studies the critical recommendations of the parliamentary committee and concludes that India needs to revisit its Model BIT to strike a balance between investment protection and State’s right to regulate.
This recalibration in India’s approach would be useful at a time when it is endeavouring to enter into investment treaties with important capital exporting countries to India.
Published in: Manchester Journal of International Economic Law
To read the full article, please click here.
