In investment arbitration, third parties are currently limited to submitting amicus curiae briefs, which tribunals often overlook. A notable instance is the Glamis Gold v. United States case, where the tribunal accepted an amicus brief but ultimately disregarded its contents in the final award. The exclusion of third-party rights within the ISDS framework has faced considerable criticism, particularly regarding its implications for human rights and environmental protections.  During the 37th Session of the Working Group III on Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform, the necessity for greater third-party participation was highlighted, as it could facilitate the consideration of crucial social issues and enhance the legitimacy of the arbitration process. In addition, non-disputing parties encounter significant challenges in accessing confidential information, which limits their ability to contribute meaningfully to cases that directly affect communities and the environment.  

This panel will address these pressing matters by examining current practices surrounding non-disputing party submissions, the role of amicus curiae briefs in influencing tribunal decisions on issues of law, and the specific obstacles non-disputing parties face in obtaining necessary information. By fostering a dialogue on potential reforms and best practices, the panel aims to explore how to create a more inclusive and equitable approach to investment arbitration that better serves the interests of all stakeholders involved.  

For more information, visit: Events - Washington Arbitration Week