Abstract

The article falls within the broad areas of investment and financial law and, in particular, it focuses on various challenges that emerge from allegations of economic crime in investor–State arbitration. In particular, what is examined is how the adjudicative power and authority of investor–State tribunals is affected by alleged investors’ economic crimes. The two examples of economic crimes discussed are money laundering and corruption, due to their growing prominence in the field of investment arbitration. The existing legal framework regarding corruption and money laundering at international and multinational levels is analysed first, as arbitrators should base their decisions on it when they face an allegation of the two aforementioned economic crimes. Afterwards, the article identifies and evaluates three possible options for arbitrators: first, to deny jurisdiction over the particular dispute; second, to refer to relevant principles of international public policy; and, third, to apply the mandatory provisions of a law other than the one applicable in the particular dispute. After critically analysing each of the three options, the article concludes with some suggestions on how arbitrators should deal with alleged cases of economic crime, and, further, how bilateral and multilateral investment treaties could be adjusted so as to tackle this evolving problem.

中文翻译：

---

外国投资中的经济犯罪指控与投资者-国家法庭的裁决权之间的关系

摘要

这篇文章属于投资和金融法的广泛领域，尤其是关注投资者与国家仲裁中经济犯罪指控所带来的各种挑战。特别是，研究的是投资者-国家法庭的裁决权和权威如何受到投资者涉嫌经济犯罪的影响。讨论的经济犯罪的两个例子是洗钱和腐败，因为它们在投资仲裁领域日益突出。首先分析国际和跨国层面有关腐败和洗钱的现有法律框架，因为仲裁员在面临上述两种经济犯罪的指控时应以此为依据做出决定。之后，本文确定并评估了仲裁员的三种可能选择：首先，否认对特定争议的管辖权；第二，参考国际公共政策的相关原则；第三，适用法律的强制性规定，而不是适用于特定争议的法律。在对这三个选项进行了批判性分析后，文章最后就仲裁员应如何处理涉嫌经济犯罪案件以及如何调整双边和多边投资条约以解决这一不断发展的问题提出了一些建议。