Please Just Try to Submit This Sample Abstract
Syahrul Fauzul Kabir- Asep Hakim Zakiran- Chicha Chairunnisa

Universitas Islam Bandung

Abstract

The international agreements between two states aimed at protecting investments, known as bilateral investment treaties (BITs), are facing a crisis due to their perceived imbalance in protecting the interests of third-world states. India, Brazil, and South Africa, classified as third-worlds, have sought to reform this crisis by re-evaluating their BIT frameworks. All substantive rules within BITs are summarized in general terms under the notion of standard of treatment. Standard of treatment in this context refers specifically to the narrow definition of the international minimum standard of treatment, including fair and equitable treatment (FET) and full protection and security (FPS). The simpler the FET is formulated, the looser the formulation can be interpreted. Conversely, the more leniently the FET is formulated, the narrower the space remaining for state policies. Third-world states seek to anticipate this by avoiding overly simplistic formulations. Regarding the FPS standard, Brazil has taken the most reformist step by removing the FPS clause from its BITs. Meanwhile, India and South Africa have limited the FPS by regulating its scope. Both states have also restricted the interpretation of the FPS according to customary international law. Indonesia, however, appears somewhat ambiguous. Despite introducing reforms in its latest BIT, Indonesia still retains FPS clauses that remain open to expansive interpretation.

Keywords: Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT)- Third World- Standard of Treatment- Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET)- Full Protection and Security (FPS).

Topic: Law and Ethics in Terms of Islamic Perspective