Bibliographie sélective OHADA

States poured millions of dollars to attract foreign renewable energy investments for climate change mitigation, however, when it becomes too hefty for some states, they have modified regulations to reduce the level of support. These regulation changes have led to dozens of investors filing arbitrations against the host states, alleging breaches of investment treaty obligations. This thesis examines whether the current investor-state dispute settlement (‘ISDS’) regime adequately addresses environmental concerns when adjudicating renewable energy investment cases. While renewable energy investments can help protect a global common (the atmosphere) and mitigate climate change, the regulation changes also seek to protect a domestic public good (financial stability of the host state). Therefore, when the protection of a global common conflicts with a domestic public interest in renewable energy ISDS cases, what are the rights and obligations of the host state and the investor? Are the existing approaches of the ISDS regime toward environmental concerns and other public interests fair and adequate, and if not, what interventions can be made? This thesis explores these questions by conducting doctrinal analysis on more than 60 renewable energy cases and the arbitral jurisprudence regarding international environmental obligations. It uses the constitutionalisation of international law to break the self-contained regime of international investment law and argues that common values should be regarded as equally important as investment protection goals in ISDS. This thesis finds that the ISDS regime considers international environmental obligations to be insignificant in supporting the host state’s defences in non-compliance of bilateral investment treaties or the investor’s claims for investment protection. This thesis shows that the current approach furthers discrepancies between climate change mitigation and international investment law. Not only does this approach fail to acknowledge the environmental connections of renewable energy investment, but it also creates opportunities for fossil fuel investors to seek compensation against environmental regulation changes using the same arguments. As an intervention against the current approach, this thesis proposes to reconstrue the concept of legitimate expectations to place common values on equal grounds with investment protection incentives. This thesis makes two significant contributions to knowledge. Firstly, it extends existing analyses of the conflicts and synergies between international investment law and environmental protection and contributes to the growing body of scholarship on this topic. Research on this topic has mainly focused on how the state safeguards environmental interests against investor protection claims. While this narrative comprises many cases, it does not capture the full picture and overlooks the possible contributions of private parties in protecting global commons. Instead, this thesis examines whether international environmental obligations can serve as a ‘shield’ for the state’s non-compliance in investment protection, or as a ‘sword’ for investors to compel the state to fulfil its international obligations. Secondly, this thesis makes an intervention to reconstrue ‘legitimate expectations’, where common values are reinforced and not only the interests of investors are protected but also the ‘legitimate expectations of a responsible investor’ from the state and local communities are taken into account.