Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Full Access Recent Anti-ISDS Discourse in the Japanese Diet: A Dressed-Up But Glaring Hypocrisy

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Recent Anti-ISDS Discourse in the Japanese Diet: A Dressed-Up But Glaring Hypocrisy

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

As in many parts of the world, an anti-investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) discourse has been propagated also in Japan. In the Japanese Diet (Japan’s parliament), ISDS is criticized as infringing State sovereignty; as being incompatible with the Japanese Constitution; as unduly restricting regulatory space and government procurement; as being biased in favor of the United States; and as being acceptable only in relation to developing States. These criticisms are difficult to sustain and in fact ineffective as investment treaties continue to be approved by the Diet by unanimity or by a large majority. An analysis of the rhetoric of these criticisms and of actual voting records suggest that investor-State arbitration itself is not an independent political issue in Japan, but used as a pretext to manifest an anti-American sentiment or to criticize the incumbent government.

Affiliations: 1: Kyoto University, Japan, hamamoto@law.kyoto-u.ac.jp

As in many parts of the world, an anti-investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) discourse has been propagated also in Japan. In the Japanese Diet (Japan’s parliament), ISDS is criticized as infringing State sovereignty; as being incompatible with the Japanese Constitution; as unduly restricting regulatory space and government procurement; as being biased in favor of the United States; and as being acceptable only in relation to developing States. These criticisms are difficult to sustain and in fact ineffective as investment treaties continue to be approved by the Diet by unanimity or by a large majority. An analysis of the rhetoric of these criticisms and of actual voting records suggest that investor-State arbitration itself is not an independent political issue in Japan, but used as a pretext to manifest an anti-American sentiment or to criticize the incumbent government.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/journals/22119000/16/5-6/22119000_016_05-06_S007_text.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/22119000-01606006&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/22119000-01606006
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/22119000-01606006
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22119000-01606006
2015-11-13
2017-11-20

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation