Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to set forth the considerations which I believe must be taken into account in framing any workable reform to the investor-state dispute settlement system and offer my comments to UNCTAD's five main reform paths. In this paper it is suggested that most of UNCTAD's reform paths involve treaty changes which are neither practicable nor will improve the present situation. However, an attempt will be made to show that it is nevertheless possible to reform the investor-state arbitration system without making changes to current treaties.