تحلیل قواعد شفافیت آنسیترال در داوری‌های سرمایه‌گذاری

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار دانشکده حقوق‌‌‌وعلوم‌سیاسی دانشگاه شیراز

10.22066/cilamag.2018.31689

چکیده

نظر به استفاده گسترده از داوری جهت حل‌و‌فصل اختلافات سرمایه­گذاری ناشی از معاهدات دو یا چندجانبه و ضرورت توجه به منافع عمومی موجود در این داوری‌ها، آنسیترال در ژوئیه 2013، مجموعه قواعدی را با هدف تضمین شفافیت در داوری میان سرمایه‌گذار با دولت، تصویب کرد. این قواعد که الزاماتی را در خصوص انتشار اطلاعات و اسناد مرتبط با داوری مقرر داشته است هرچند تجربه نخست و معیار تمام‌عیار شفافیت در داوری نبوده، از آن جهت که اماره مهم شفافیت را به‌جای اماره محرمانگی و حریم خصوصی تثبیت کرده، حائز اهمیت بسیار است. با توجه به تصویب عهدنامه مرتبط با شفافیت، استفاده از این قواعد، زمینه را برای هماهنگی و یکنواخت­سازی بیشتر مقررات ناظر بر داوری فراهم می‌کند. 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Overall Analysis of UNCITRAL’s Rules on Transparency in Investment Arbitration

نویسنده [English]

  • Ali Rezaeei
Assistant Professor in Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shiraz University
چکیده [English]

Due to the widespread use of arbitration to resolve disputes arising from bilateral or multilateral investment treaties, and necessity of paying attention to the public interest in these arbitrations, UNCITRAL approved a set of rules in July 2013 that aimed to ensure transparency in investor-state arbitration. Although these rules require provisions concerning the publication of information and documentation relating to arbitration and are not the first experience and perfect criteria of transparency in arbitration, they are of great importance since they represent only transparency instead of confidentiality and privacy. With due regard to the adoption of the Convention on the Transparency in Investment Arbitrations, the use of these rules could result in further coordination and harmonization of provisions on arbitration.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Transparency
  • Arbitration
  • UCITRAL’s Rules on Transparency
  • Investment Treaty
  • Investor-state

الف. فارسی

ـ کتاب

  • محبی، محسن و حسین کاویار؛ مجموعه مقررات جدید آنسیترال درباره داوری بین‌المللی، خرسندی،1393.

ـ مقاله

  • خزاعی، حسین؛ «خصوصی و محرمانه‌بودن داوری در حقوق تجارت داخلی و بین‌المللی»، فصلنامه حقوق، مجله دانشکده حقوق‌وعلوم‌سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، دوره 39، شماره 3، پاییز 1388.
  • زندیه، حسن و حسن سالارسروی؛ «شفافیت اسنادی و حق دسترسی آزاد به اطلاعات»، فصلنامه گنجینه اسناد، سال بیست‌‌­وسوم، دفتر اول، بهار 1392.
  • عنایت، سید‌حسین؛ «محرمانه یا آشکاربودن داوری تجاری»، مجله تحقیقات حقوقی، شماره 27 و 28، پاییز و زمستان 1378.
  • ناعمه، حسن؛ «شفافیت و مبارزه با فساد در انعقاد قراردادهای اداری ایران»، فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، ویژه­نامه شماره 4، 1390.

‌ ـ قوانین، آرا و اسناد ملی و بین‌المللی

  • اعلامیه جهانی حقوق بشر.
  • قانون اساسی جمهوری اسلامی ایران.
  • قانون انتشار و دسترسی آزاد به اطلاعات، روزنامه رسمی، شماره 18915، مورخ 14/11/1388.
  • قانون آیین دادرسی دادگاه‌های عمومی و انقلاب در امور مدنی، مصوب 1379.
  • قانون داوری تجاری بین‌المللی، مصوب 1376.

 

ب. انگلیسی

- Articles:

  • Adeleke, Fola, “Investor-State Arbitration and the Public Interest Regulation Theory”, Fourth Biennial Global Conference, World Trade Institute, University of Bern, July 10 - 12, 2014.
  • Belohlavek, Alexander J., “Confidentiality and Publicity in Investment Arbitration, Public Interest and Scope of Powers Vested in Arbitral Tribunals”, Czech Yearbook of International Law, 2011.
  • Buys, Cindy Galway, “The Tensions between Confidentiality and Transparency in International Arbitration”, American Review of International Arbitration, vol. 14, No. 121, 2003.
  • Chambers, Simone, “Behind Closed Doors: Publicity, Secrecy, and the Quality of Deliberation”, Journal of Political Philosophy, vol. 12, Issue 4, December 2004.
  • Choudhury, Barnali, “Recapturing Public Power: Is Investment Arbitration’s Engagement of the Public Interest Contributing to the Democratic Deficit”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 41, 2008.
  • Gómez, Katia Fach, “Rethinking the Role of Amicus Curia in International Investment Arbitration: How to Draw the Line Favorable for the Public Interest”, Fordham International Law Journal, vol. 35, 2012.
  • Hachez, Nicolas & Wouters, Jan, “International Investment Dispute Settlement in the 21st Century: Does the Preservation of the Public Interest Require an Alternative to the Arbitral Model?”, The Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies,Working Paper, No. 81, February 2012.
  • Johnson, Lise, “New UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules on Transparency: Application, Content and Next Steps”, International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2013.
  • Katranstiotis, Dimitrios, “Transparency in International Investment Arbitration: from the Current towards the Future Normative Framework,” International Hellenic University, 2013-2014, p. 8.
  • Montineri, Corinne, “UNCITRAL Standards on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration, Trade Development through Harmonization of Commercial Law”, 2014.
  • Sabater, Aníbal, “Towards Transparency in Arbitration (A Cautious Approach)”, Berkeley Journal of International Law Publicit, vol. 5, 2010.
  • Teitelbaum, Ruth, “A Look at the Public Interest in Investment Arbitration: Is It Unique? What Should We Do About It?”, Berkeley Journal of International Law Publicist, vol. 5, 2010.

- Cases and Materials:

  • CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, Award, 12 May 2005.
  • Sempra Energy International v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/16, Award 28 September 2007.
  • Enron Corporation and Ponderosa Assets, L.P. v. the Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/3, Award, 22 May 2007.
  • Delivering Justice: Program of Action to strengthen The Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, Report of the Secretary-General (2012), A/66/749.
  • Transparency and Third Party Participation in Investor-State Dispute Settlement Procedures, Statement by the OECD Investment Committee, Working Papers on International Investment, 2005.
  • Arbitration Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
  • Arbitration Rules of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC)
  • ICSID’s Additional Facility
  • Methanex Corporation v. the United States of America, Decision of the Tribunal on Petitions from Third Persons to Intervene as Amici Curiae, 15 January 2001, available on 29 July 2010 at: http://www.state.gov/ s/l/c5818.htm.
  • North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
  • Rules of Procedure for Arbitration of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
  • Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A., and Vivendi Universal S.A. v. the Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/19 - Order in Response to a Petition for Transparency and Participation as Amicus Curiae of May 19, 2005.
  • Transparency Registry (a repository for the publication of information and documents in treaty-based investor-State arbitration), UNCITRAL Secretariat, (Transparency Registry), Vienna International Centre, 2014, available at http://www.uncitral.org/transparency-registry/en/guidelines.html
  • UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (as revised in 2010)
  • UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration (the "Rules on Transparency"). Available at:http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/rules-on-transparency/ Rules-on-Transparency-E.pdf.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Fifty-eighth session, New York, 4-8 February 2013, A/CN.9/WG.II/WP.176.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Fifty-eighth session, New York, 4-8 February 2013, A/CN.9/WG.II/WP.177.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Fifty-fourth session, New York, 7-11 February 2011, A/CN.9/WG.II/WP.163.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Fifty-seventh session, Vienna, 1-5 October 2012, A/CN.9/WG.II/WP.172.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Fifty-third session, Vienna, 4-8 October 2010, A/CN.9/WG.II/WP.159.
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, Working Group II (Arbitration and Conciliation), Forty-fifth session, New York, 25 June-6 July 2012, A/CN.9/741.