Investor Legitimate Expectation and Indirect Expropriation in Domestic Regulation Concerning the Application of Domestic Raw Application
Downloads
Law No 11/2020 concerning Job Creation (Omnibus Law') mandates the use of domestic raw materials for all industries in Indonesia. Following the passage of the Omnibus Law, Indonesia issued Government Regulation No 28/2021 concerning Industrial Management and Presidential Regulation No 12/2021 concerning the amendment of Presidential Regulation No 16/2018 concerning Government Procurement of Goods and Services. Both regulations oblige all industries in Indonesia to use domestic raw materials pursuant to the Omnibus Law. In investment law, this kind of policy could lead to indirect expropriation because when an investor makes an investment in a host country, the raw material and machines for production might come from their home state or other states. Furthermore, a public-private partnership contract with investors funding infrastructure projects for at least 50 years using materials agreed upon in advance will lead to indirect expropriation. The method used in this research was legal research theory with statute and conceptual approaches. From this research, the policy of the Indonesian government can be described as indirect expropriation because the regulation is effective and enforced.
Downloads
‘ADF Group, Inc. v. United States, 18 ICSID Rev. 195, 228, 276 (Jan. 9, 2003) Lamm, Arbs.), Remarkably, the UNCTAD Secretariat Has Questioned Whether the Stan U.N.
Conference on Trade & Development, Fair and Equitable Treatment 15, U (Vol. Ill), U.N. Sales'.
Ian Brownlie, Public International Law (6th edn, Oxford University Press 2003).
ICSID, ‘Tecnicas Medoambientales Tecmed S.A. v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/2, Award, May 29, 2003.'
Kementerian Hukum dan HAM RI, ‘Laporan Akhir Analisis Dan Evaluasi Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perindustrian' (2021).
London Ct. Int'l Arb, ‘Occidental Exploration and Production Company (OEPC) v. Ecuador, Case No. UN 3467' (2004) .
M. Sornarajah, The International Law on Foreign Investment (Cambridge University Press 1994).
Peter D. Isakoff, ‘Defining the Scope Od Indirect Expropriation for International Investment' (2013) 3 The Global Business Law Review <https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/gblr/vol3/iss2/4 >.
Peter Muchlinski, ‘"Caveat Investor”? The Relevance of the Conduct of the Investor under the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard' (2006) 55 The International and Comparative Law Quarterly.
Pope & Talbot, ‘Inc v.Canada, Interim Award' (2000).
Sara Mansour Fallah, ‘Judicial Expropriations-Difficulties in Drawing the Line between Adjudication and Expropriation' (2019) 2 Judicial Measures and Investment Treaty Law <https://www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=2635>.
Stevens D and, ‘Bilateral Investment Treaties' [1995] ICSID 98.
UNCITRAL, ‘Saluka Investments BV v. Czech Republic, Partial Award, Mar. 17' (2006).
UNCTAD Investment Policy Hub, ‘National Grid PLC v. The Argentine Republic, National Grid v. Argentina'.
””, ‘Saluka Investments BV v. The Czech Republic' (Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator).
Vandevelde KJ, ‘A Unified Theory of Fair and Equitable Treatment' (2010) 43 International Law And Politics.
El Paso Energy International Company v Argentine Republic.
International Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v The United Mexican States, Thunderbird v Mexico.
LG&E Energy Corp, LG&E Capital Corp and LG&E International Inc v Argentine Republic LG&E v Argentina.
Occidental Exploration and Production Company v Republic of Ecuador (I)( Case No UN3467), Occidental v Ecuador (I) | Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator | UNCTAD Investment Policy Hub.
Parkerings–Compagniet AS v Republic of Lithuania.
Tecnicas Medioambientales Tecmed SA v United Mexican States.
Total SA v The Argentine Republic Total SA v The Argentine Republic.
Copyright (c) 2022 Muchammad Zaidun, Yuniarti, Widhayani Dian Pawestri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
