Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  418 / 536 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 418 / 536 Next Page
Page Background

404

KATARÍNA CHOVANCOVÁ

CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ

its less outspoken counterpart, as it postulates by its exact wording the definition of the

limit of the arbitrators’ review with respect to non-precluded measures.

71

3. Interpretation of NPM Clauses by Investment Tribunals

3.1 The Prelude to Argentinian ICSID Arbitrations

The latest Argentinian dreadful fiscal and currency crisis at the end of 2001 was an

overture that triggered out a lingering torrent of investment arbitrations, initiated on

the grounds of expropriation of foreign investments in Argentina. Massive financial

amounts awarded by ICSID tribunals, sufficiently capable of causing disruptions

in the state’s economy, are a bitter price to pay. It is submitted that Argentina takes

some portion of the blame for not being prudent enough when ignoring the global

economic recession, which repeatedly led to its sovereign debt skyrocketing, and

also for paying too much attention to the IMF advice,

72

when later promoting its

investment plan in a haphazard way.

While the Argentinian economic chagrin is usually connected with the Public

Emergency Law,

73

adopted at the beginning of 2002, causing investors sharp shocks

immediately, the setting is not entirely accurate. To trace the origins of the last crisis,

it is necessary to dig deeper, beginning with the first out of three escalated economic

crises in 1982 with heavy debt as a courtesy of the recent war and a following high

devaluation of the national currency, which led to a severe currency exchange crisis.

74

In spite of the looming crisis, several thorough reforms after 1989 stabilized the

country through the post-World War II like pegging of the Argentinian peso to the

U.S. dollar, with combined particles of the fixed exchange rates system and the gold

standard system surviving.

75

Equally, privatization, targeted at the core of national

industry has brought its desired fruit with the flood of foreign investments, and

investors, being protected against all imaginable risks.

However, the policy of fully converting the peso to the US dollar proved to

be unsustainable in the long run due to various factors, influencing the global as

well as the national Argentinian economy. As a result, the latest economic crises at

the beginning of new millennium varied a great deal from the rosy economic view,

typical for the 1990s.

76

National currency reserves almost diminished, the foreign

71

For instance Article 10 Section 1 of the US-Armenian BIT 1996:

The first paragraph of Article X reserves

the right of a Party to take measures

it regards as necessary

for the maintenance of public order, the

fulfilment of its international obligations with respect to international peace and security, or the protection of

its own essential security interests.

72

See

e.g.

SYKES, A.: Economic “Necessity” in International Law,

op. cit.

, p. 316.

73

The Public Emergency and Exchange Regime Reform Act Nº 25.561 2002 /Executive Order

No. 50/2002/.

74

KASENETZ, E.D.: Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures,

op. cit

., p. 712.

75

HERDEGEN, T.:

Principles of International Economic Law,

OUP, Oxford, 2013, p. 14.

76

STONE SWEET, A.: Investor- State Arbitration: Proportionality’s New Frontier,

op. cit.,

p. 19.