Interaction between International Investment Law and International Humanitarian Law in Investment Claims Arising from Armed Conflicts

When a foreign investor is affected by armed conflict, the rules of international investment law on the protection of foreign investors and international humanitarian law on the protection of civilians, including foreign investors, are both valid and since there is no specific precedent in this regard, the arbitral tribunals may, at their discretion, in each case, prioritize one of them as special law and apply to the dispute. Given that the choice of each of these rules will result in a different level of protection for foreign investment, the main question of the present study is to determine which of the above rules is preferable to the other as special law and what are the implications of applying each one in such dispute and breach of which one can be invoked as the international responsibility of the host state to the investment. This paper analyzes the above question in an exploratory way to remove the legal gap regarding the conflict between international humanitarian law and international investment law in investment disputes arising from armed conflicts.