Study On The Relationship Of "Double-track" Dispute Resolution Mechanism In International Investment Treaties

With the continuous development of international trade,foreign investment has become an important way of transnational capital flow,most investment treaties have stipulated investment arbitration and inter-state arbitration systems.These two dispute settlement mechanisms are parallel to international investment treaties.Investment arbitration mainly resolves investment disputes between investors and host countries,at the same time,interstate arbitration mainly solves the “interpretation and application” of investment treaties,so investment arbitration and inter-state arbitration Can be called a “dual track” dispute resolution mechanism.China is an important participant in international investment practice,it has the dual status of capital exporting countries and capital importing countries.There is no clear rule in current international law and domestic law to explain the relationship between these two mechanisms.The theory has little research on the relationship between the two mechanisms,this can easily lead investors,parties and arbitral tribunals to abuse the dispute settlement mechanism,which is not conducive to the protection of investors,the interests of the host country and the normal conduct of international investment activities.In response to this problem,this paper conducts an in-depth study on the relationship between the “dual track” dispute settlement mechanism in international investment treaties,aiming at providing ideas and countermeasures for the coordination of investment arbitration mechanism and inter-state arbitration mechanism.This will provide reference for China’s attitude and position in the “dual track” mechanism.The article is divided into four parts: The first part is an overview of the “dual track”dispute settlement mechanism in international investment treaties,which is the basis of this analysis.First of all,it explains the meaning and origin of the “dual track” mechanism,that is,the international investment dispute settlement model exists in parallel with investment arbitration and inter-state arbitration.Secondly,it discusses the origin and application conditions of these two arbitration systems,and briefly analyzes their respective advantages and disadvantages.The second part is the conflict relationship between investment arbitration mechanism and inter-state arbitration mechanism.This part first analyzes the theoretical conflicts between the two mechanisms,that is,there are problems in which the legal provisions are unclear and the theoretical research is inconsistent.Secondly,it analyzes the conflicts of jurisdictionbetween the two mechanisms,through case studies,it shows that there is a possibility of conflict of jurisdiction between the investment arbitration mechanism and the inter-state arbitration mechanism.Thirdly,the conflict of interpretation between the two is analyzed,that is,the investment arbitration mechanism and the inter-state arbitration mechanism may appear inconsistent with the interpretation of the investment treaty.Finally,the conflict of rulings between the two is analyzed,that is,there may be inconsistencies in the ruling between the two mechanisms.The third part is the supplementary role of the inter-state arbitration mechanism to the investment arbitration mechanism.The investment arbitration mechanism provides an equal,convenient and efficient way for investors to resolve corresponding investment disputes.It is more convenient and flexible than inter-State arbitration,and provides clear legal procedures and conditions,making dispute settlement more disciplined than inter-state arbitration.It has made up for the deficiencies in the inter-state arbitration.At the same time,the inter-state arbitration mechanism can help to make up for the lack of investment arbitration,implement investment arbitral awards,expand the jurisdiction of investment arbitration,and provide more remedies for investment arbitration.Therefore,it has an important complementary role to the investment arbitration mechanism.The fourth part is the Chinese position in the “dual track” dispute settlement mechanism of the international investment treaty.China is an important participant in the practice of international investment law.It has the dual status of capital importing country and capital exporting country.In order to protect the interests of Chinese overseas investors and domestic public interests,how to deal with the relationship between the two mechanisms is an unavoidable topic.First of all,China should accept the concept of a “dual track” dispute settlement model,it is necessary to adopt a “dual track” mechanism in which the investment arbitration mechanism and the inter-state arbitration mechanism are parallel,and exclude the single model.Secondly,by signing specific commitments and exclusion clauses,the jurisdiction of the two arbitration systems is clarified,so that the settlement of disputes is more disciplined.Thirdly,the principle of good faith is appropriately introduced,and the principle of “resolved” is used reasonably to avoid two arbitration systems.In the end,fully considering the dual status of our country,we have focused on the conclusion of the treaty,thus safeguarded the interests of our investors and the country.