SBORNÍK 66 SVOČ 2016

tribunals have been criticized for the manner in which they solve the conflict. It is said that tribunals protect foreign investors at the expense of competing interests of the population of the state, 11 and that they tend not to prescribe much weight to human rights instruments. 12 The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights warned that tribunals interpret investment treaties broadly, which threatens human rights. 13 This might appear a little surprising, especially in the light of the rule that during interpretation of international treaties regard should be given to all other relevant rules of international law applicable in the relation between the parties. 14 Pursuant to this rule, investment treaties and human rights instruments should be interpreted in harmony. Nevertheless, there is still tension between the two, 15 and it appears that human rights are yet to find their proper place in international investment arbitration. III. Situations where Human Rights and International Investment Law Meet International investment law practice offers several investment arbitration cases where investment law met with human rights. The purpose of this section is to inspect the part which human rights played in these cases, to categorize them, and to assess whether all the categories present a threat to compliance with human rights. Examination of international investment arbitration cases where human rights were raised shows that the two elements directly interact in one of two situations. In the first situation, an investor claims that a state has breached its human rights; these instances are described in section III.A. In the second situation, a state defends itself against investor’s claim by stating that the measures the investor complains about were necessary in order to protect human rights of the population; the respective manner in which human rights are used in each case are outlined in section III.B. A. tate Breached Investor’s Human Rights The first group of cases where human rights and international investment law meet consists of a scenario where an investor complains that the host state has breached his or her human rights. This situation is not very common; 16 human rights arguments Choudhury, ‘Recapturing Public Power: Is Investment Arbitration’s Engagement of the Public Interest Contributing to the Democratic Deficit?’ (2008) 41 Vand J Transnat’l L 775, 791; cf Sheldon Leader, ‘Human Rights, Risks, and New Strategies for Global Investment’ (2006) 9 Journal of International Economic Law 657, 657. 11 Schill (n 4) 88. 12 Hirsch (n 4) 107. 13 UNHCR Report (n 4) 3-4. 14 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (adopted 22 May 1969, entered into force 27 January 1980) 1155 UNTS 331 art 31(3)(c). 15 Simma (n 3) 574. 16 Clara Reiner and Christoph Schreuer, ‘Human Rights and International Investment Arbitration’ in P M Dupuy, F Francioni and E U Petersmann (eds), Human Rights in International Investment Law and Arbitration (Oxford University Press 2009) (Reiner and Schreuer) 88.

146