India’s 2016 Model Bit And UNCITRAL ISDS Reform: Compatibility, Sovereignty And Influence
Makwana Hempallavi Govindbhai, LLM, Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar.
ABSTRACT
Investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) has become the subject of growing scrutiny over regulatory autonomy, procedural efficiency, adjudicatory legitimacy and the balance between investor protection and State sovereignty. The Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) of 2016 represents a significant modification of its investment-treaty policy through narrower substantive protections, increased regulatory safeguards and conditions for access to international arbitration. In parallel, the UNCITRAL Working Group III has embarked on a comprehensive reform agenda addressing procedural, institutional and dispute-prevention concerns within ISDS. This paper compares the compatibility between these two approaches, focusing on local remedies, dispute prevention, regulatory autonomy and adjudicatory legitimacy. It argues that the two frameworks demonstrate partial functional convergence but differ significantly in substantive treaty design and institutional architecture. The paper also distinguishes convergence from influence, assessing India’s participation in reforming multilateral system, alongside developments in its post-2016 treaty practice.
Keywords: Model Bilateral Investment Treaty, UNCITRAL ISDS Reform, Compatibility, Sovereignty, Influence.
