Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation
Corruption in International Investment Arbitration by Llamzon, Aloysius P (1st September 2014)

Part III Towards a Jurisprudence Constante in Investment Arbitration Decision-Making on Corruption, 10 State Responsibility for Corruption: The Attribution Asymmetry

From: Corruption in International Investment Arbitration

Aloysius P Llamzon

Subject(s):
Corruption — Investor — UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules — Responsibility of states — Wrongful acts — Attribution

This chapter examines the law on State responsibility for corruption. It argues that the application of the international law on responsibility to transnational corruption issues in investment arbitration should involve bringing States to account for the fulfilment of their national and international anti-corruption obligations, before the issue is allowed to be used for mostly exculpatory reasons. Transnational corruption cannot be combated effectively by focusing and punishing only the foreign investor, which is only one side of the equation. Corruption-plagued states are doomed to repeat the failures of governance that have persisted in their public spheres so long as they are not asked to do more.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.