Recent Anti-ISDS Discourse in the Japanese Diet: A Dressed-Up But Glaring Hypocrisy
In: The Journal of World Investment & TradeSearch for other papers by Shotaro Hamamoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
As in many parts of the world, an anti-investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) discourse has been propagated also in Japan. In the Japanese Diet (Japan’s parliament), ISDS is criticized as infringing State sovereignty; as being incompatible with the Japanese Constitution; as unduly restricting regulatory space and government procurement; as being biased in favor of the United States; and as being acceptable only in relation to developing States. These criticisms are difficult to sustain and in fact ineffective as investment treaties continue to be approved by the Diet by unanimity or by a large majority. An analysis of the rhetoric of these criticisms and of actual voting records suggest that investor-State arbitration itself is not an independent political issue in Japan, but used as a pretext to manifest an anti-American sentiment or to criticize the incumbent government.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 452 | 103 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 265 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 67 | 6 | 0 |
Recent Anti-ISDS Discourse in the Japanese Diet: A Dressed-Up But Glaring Hypocrisy
In: The Journal of World Investment & TradeSearch for other papers by Shotaro Hamamoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
As in many parts of the world, an anti-investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) discourse has been propagated also in Japan. In the Japanese Diet (Japan’s parliament), ISDS is criticized as infringing State sovereignty; as being incompatible with the Japanese Constitution; as unduly restricting regulatory space and government procurement; as being biased in favor of the United States; and as being acceptable only in relation to developing States. These criticisms are difficult to sustain and in fact ineffective as investment treaties continue to be approved by the Diet by unanimity or by a large majority. An analysis of the rhetoric of these criticisms and of actual voting records suggest that investor-State arbitration itself is not an independent political issue in Japan, but used as a pretext to manifest an anti-American sentiment or to criticize the incumbent government.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 452 | 103 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 265 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 67 | 6 | 0 |