Open Access
Moonlighting revisited : International Court of Justice judges as adjudicators in investment arbitration
Loading...
Files
Moonlight_revisited_2024.pdf (237.1 KB)
Full-text in Open Access, Published version
License
Attribution 4.0 International
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
2766-2667
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
African journal of international economic law, 2024, Vol. 4, pp. 4-28
Cite
GIEMZA, Wojciech, Moonlighting revisited : International Court of Justice judges as adjudicators in investment arbitration, African journal of international economic law, 2024, Vol. 4, pp. 4-28 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/77951
Abstract
This article presents a quantitative analysis of the involvement of judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as adjudicators in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). As ICJ judges participated in more than 10% of known investment arbitrations and almost one third of ICSID annulment proceedings, the 2018 decision to prohibit active ICJ members to decide investment disputes bear relevant implications for both the ICJ and ISDS. The article discusses the reasons for and implications of ICJ judges adjudicating investment disputes. The quantitative analysis shows that ICJ status is a relevant factor in arbitral appointment process, ICJ judges are often appointed presidents or arbitrators for the respondent and the overall dynamic of appointments follows patterns of general ISDS developments. At the same time, the outcomes of investment disputes decided by ICJ judges are balanced and do not confirm the assumed pro-state bias of the judges.