Addressing (In)Equality in Redress: Human Rights-Led Reform of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism

In the context of ongoing debates concerning the reform of the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, this article critiques the widely-accepted approach that seeks to fit international human rights law (IHRL) into the existing structure of ISDS and argues that IHRL should at least be treated as `primus inter pares' vis-a-vis international investment law. Testing ISDS on the touchstone of the human rights to equality, non-discrimination, and an effective remedy, the authors demonstrate that ISDS is incompatible with IHRL. Considering various structural and systemic prob- lems, abolishing ISDS is perhaps the only normatively sound solution to address this incompatibility with IHRL. However, as this may not be politically feasible in the near future, this article articulates eight principles for a human-rights compatible interna- tional dispute settlement mechanism. We argue that these principles should inform the current efforts to reform the ISDS mechanism to avoid the risk of making only cosmetic changes.