Abstract

Despite progress being made in the business and human rights field in defining corporate responsibility for human rights, defining foreign investors roles vis-à-vis human rights remains mainly stagnant. The idea that businesses have responsibility for human rights is well ensconced in global norms and is based on society's expectations of business in the 21st century. Yet despite this widespread recognition, international investment law is silent on the matter. This leaves a disconnect between the norms dictating the corporate responsibility for human rights in public international law and those found in international investment law.One way to better align progress in the business and human rights movement with international investment law is to introduce investor obligations for human rights. These obligations can be located both in investment treaties as well as in non-treaty sources. Moreover, investment arbitration provides multiple entrypoints for tribunals to consider such obligations, for example through counterclaims, jurisdictional claims, or admissibility claims, among others.Two primary benefits arise from introducing investor obligations for human rights. First, it can act as vehicle by which business and human rights norms, generally, can be enforced. Second, and more importantly, introducing investor obligations for human rights can help to better contextualize the interpretation of IIAs. Introducing such obligations can be used to remind tribunals that international investment law operates in a system that includes non-investment concerns such as human rights.Considering such obligations, in and of themselves, however, are unlikely to prompt wider changes in international investment law. Nevertheless, including investor obligations in international investment law may prompt tribunals to give more balanced interpretations to international investment agreements. This can work towards ensuring that international investment law serves its ultimate aim of promoting a state’s development.

中文翻译：

---

投资者对人权的义务

摘要

尽管在企业和人权领域在界定公司对人权的责任方面取得了进展，但相对于人权而言，界定外国投资者的角色仍然停滞不前。企业对人权负有责任这一观念已在全球规范中得到了充分体现，并且是基于21世纪社会对企业的期望。尽管得到了广泛的认可，但国际投资法对此事却保持沉默。这使国际公法中规定公司对人权的责任的规范与国际投资法中规定的规范之间存在脱节。使商业和人权运动的进展与国际投资法更好地保持一致的一种方法是引入投资者对人权的义务权利。这些义务既可以位于投资条约中，也可以位于非条约来源中。此外，投资仲裁为仲裁庭考虑此类义务提供了多个切入点，例如通过反诉，司法管辖权索赔或可受理性索赔等考虑。引入投资者的人权义务产生了两个主要好处。首先，它可以作为通常可以实施企业和人权规范的手段。其次，更重要的是，引入投资者对人权的义务可以帮助更好地结合国际投资协定的解释。引入此类义务可以提醒法庭，国际投资法的运作体系包含人权等非投资问题，但是考虑到此类义务本身，不太可能促使国际投资法发生更广泛的变化。但是，将投资者义务纳入国际投资法可能会促使法庭对国际投资协议作出更加平衡的解释。这可以确保国际投资法达到促进国家发展的最终目的。