The importance of the widespread reliance upon direct arbitration, particularly arbitration under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), and of the practice of “arbitration without privity” is at the root of the search for a definition of investment, as underlined by the 2013 Resolution of the Institut de droit international (IDI). The Resolution refers to a development-friendly definition of investment. This article aims to explain to what extent a definition based upon references to sustainable development would constitute an acceptable specification, albeit a partial one, of the term “development” used in the IDI Resolution, in light of the need of a reconciliation between private and public interests within current international investment law. The article also deals with the issue of whether the ICSID Convention provides for an autonomous definition of investment that cannot be overridden by the terms of a given international investment treaty, and if so, which criteria should be taken into consideration for the purposes of determining whether an investment exists within the meaning of Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention.
The World Health Organization (who) was established in 1946 as a specialized agency of the United Nations (un). Since its establishment, the who has managed outbreaks of infectious diseases from a regulatory, as well as an operational perspective. The adoption of the International Health Regulations (ihrs) has been an important achievement from the former perspective. When the Ebola epidemic intensified in 2014, the who Director General issued temporary recommendations under the ihrs in order to reduce the spread of the disease and minimize cross-border barriers to international trade. The un Secretary General and then the Security Council and the General Assembly have also taken action against the Ebola epidemic. In particular, the Security Council adopted a resolution under Chapter vii of the un Charter, and thus connected the maintenance of the international peace and security to the health and social emergency. After dealing with the role of the who as a guide and coordinator of the reaction to epidemics, this article shows how the action by the Security Council against the Ebola epidemic impacts on the who ‘authority’ for the protection of health.