Div Kr. Singh, B.A.LL.B. (Hons.), Maharashtra National Law University, Mumbai
ABSTRACT
The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism, designed to protect foreign investments, has become a contentious issue in international law. Critics highlight several concerns, including lack of transparency, arbitrator bias, inconsistency, threats to state sovereignty, high costs, and the chilling effect on regulation. This paper examines these criticisms and compares the proposed reforms aimed at addressing these issues. By analysing both the advantages and disadvantages of ISDS, and incorporating notable case laws, we aim to provide a nuanced perspective on the mechanism's effectiveness and areas needing improvement.