HUMAN RIGHTS PARADIGMS IN ICSID INVESTMENT DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: A COMPARATIVE ASEAN STUDY

Authors

  • Enna Budiman Faculty of Law, Universitas 17 Agustus 1945, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56371/jirpl.v7i2.601

Keywords:

Human Rights, ICSID, International Investment, Arbitration, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs)

Abstract

This research examines the dynamics of the relationship between the enforcement of Human Rights (HR) and the role of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) as the principal international arbitration institution in investment disputes. The background of this study is grounded in the tension between the protection of foreign investors—primarily through bilateral investment treaties—and the obligations of host states to safeguard public interests and the human rights of their citizens, which are often overlooked in conventional investment arbitration awards. The research raises two main questions: first, how human rights are positioned within ICSID jurisprudence; and second, how ASEAN countries integrate human rights clauses into their international investment agreements in order to balance economic and social interests. The research employs a normative juridical method, utilizing a conceptual approach, a statutory approach, and a comparative approach across several ASEAN member states. Secondary data in the form of ICSID arbitral awards and international investment agreements are analyzed qualitatively. The findings indicate that although ICSID has traditionally been investor–state centric, there is a discernible shift in which human rights issues are increasingly considered through state counter-claims. From a comparative perspective, several ASEAN countries have begun updating their model bilateral investment treaties to allow greater regulatory space for public policies related to human rights. In conclusion, harmonization between the international investment law regime and human rights law is crucial to prevent fragmentation in international law. This study recommends procedural reforms within the ICSID framework to accommodate third-party participation (amicus curiae) and the standardization of human rights clauses in investment treaties at the ASEAN regional level in order to strengthen the bargaining position of member states.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bonnitcha, J., Poulsen, L. N. S., & Waibel, M. (2017). The political economy of the investment treaty regime. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/oxford-law-pro/book/5717

Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention).

Giudicini, A., & Puccio, L. (2014). The amicus curiae phenomenon in international investment law: In search of a consistent approach. Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 13(2).

Indriawati, R. M., & Kbarek, S. T. I. (2025). Investasi asing langsung sebagai katalis pertumbuhan ekonomi di Indonesia: Studi komprehensif. Jurnal Oportunitas: Ekonomi Pembangunan, 4(2), 202–217. https://doi.org/10.29303/oportunitas.v4i2.2230

Nedumpara, J. J., & Laddha, A. (2020). Human rights and environmental counterclaims in investment treaty arbitration.

Putusan Arbitrase: Urbaser S.A. and Consorcio de Aguas Bilbao Bizkaia, Bilbao Biskaia Ur Partuergoa v. The Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/26).

United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).

Vandaele, A. (2005). International investment law and human rights.

Downloads

Published

2026-02-23

How to Cite

Enna Budiman. (2026). HUMAN RIGHTS PARADIGMS IN ICSID INVESTMENT DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: A COMPARATIVE ASEAN STUDY. JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review, 7(2), 362–367. https://doi.org/10.56371/jirpl.v7i2.601