Modernization of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System: reform or revolution?

INTRODUCTION . The UN Commission on International Trade Law established Working Group III in 2017. Within the framework of this Group, States’ delegations and representatives international governmental non-governmental organizations seek to work out solutions identified problems investor-State dispute settlement system. Such include: lack consistency predictability arbitral awards, independence impartiality arbitrators, cost duration proceedings. Part ways suggested by UNCITRAL Secretariat States remedy could be estimated as reform system, but several proposals seem a revolution. MATERIALS AND METHODS authors researched provisions bilateral investment treaties, case law tribunals demonstrating ISDS well works Russian foreign scholars. methodological basis research contains general scientific special methods. RESEARCH RESULTS have analyzed system overviewed III. Firstly, considered draft code conduct for third-party funding an advisory center It has been stated that each these initiatives is able solve certain Secondly, documents creation appellate mechanism standing multilateral disputes. concluded may bring fundamental changes DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS shortcomings can remedied only its reform. Every problem should rectified through consistent work, not radical changes. revolutionary considered, such instance court, will existing problems, rather add new ones. For example, “revolution” result establishment two parallel regimes investorstate resolution.