International Investment Arbitration and Corruption Claims: An Analysis of World Duty Free v. Kenya
In some recent investment arbitration cases, tribunals have been presented with facts that suggest that foreign investors and public officials in the host state have engaged in corrupt practices. In its analysis of the extension of the anti-corruption campaign to investment arbitration, this article examines the legal measures adopted to combat corruption before investor-state arbitral tribunals in light of a study of World Duty Free Co. Ltd. v. The Republic of Kenya. An examination of the background to the World Duty Free v. Kenya dispute, the broader circumstances that surrounded the dispute, and Kenyas political climate that was not within the tribunals purview, demonstrate that investment arbitration tribunals are not sufficiently equipped to exhaustively tackle corruption. Given the intricate political and public nature of corruption, responses to foreign investment-related corruption also have to be multi-faceted.
Volume (Year): 4 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://www.degruyter.com|
|Order Information:||Web: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ldr|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:4:y:2011:i:3:n:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.