published on Cato Online Forum October 2015
Emerging from relative obscurity, the issue of investment protection has become the main bone of contention in the increasingly heated debate about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Critics argue that investment treaties typically grant foreign investors more extensive rights than are afforded domestic investors, including the right to bypass host-country legal systems and bring ISDS cases against their host-country governments. Meanwhile, proponents of treaty-based investment protection and arbitration have had difficulty alleviating the public’s concerns. This essay addresses three common arguments put forward to support the idea of including investment disciplines in the TTIP.