In the current era of advanced technology, the convergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data presents intricate challenges in the technical and doctrinal aspects of law and the fundamental principles of jurisprudence. Addressing this challenge entails three potential approaches: reevaluating the independent status of specific foundational categories, reconfiguring the interpretation of such categories, or steadfastly defending and enhancing our understanding of specific classifications. The reconstruction of the essential concept of "law" remains uncertain and necessitates further deliberation. Although the new technological era has not introduced entirely novel jurisprudential dilemmas, it has reconsidered existing perspectives. Swiftly and effectively responding to these challenges becomes paramount in seizing fresh opportunities for the independent advancement of Chinese jurisprudence. The purpose of the study is to push the boundaries of jurisprudence by exploring and addressing legal issues arising in the era of technological advancements. The qualitative research methodology has been applied in this article.
24 July 2024 in Environment, Development and Sustainability
This research article explores aligning and optimizing dispute resolution mechanisms in international law, particularly within the World Trade Organization (WTO) and Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) contexts. Addressing challenges arising from the "spaghetti bowl effect" of multiple treaty regimes, it examines the interplay between WTO and ISDS systems, aiming for harmonization and reduced jurisdictional inconsistencies. Traditional coordination methods are evaluated, revealing limitations in adapting to this evolving paradigm. Instead, an "articulation clause" and the "principle of comity" are proposed as innovative approaches for rationalizing dispute resolution. These strategies aim to transcend rivalry between WTO and ISDS mechanisms, expediting impasse resolution in the WTO Appellate Body. The study promotes a strategic shift, encouraging stakeholders to view dual mechanisms as mutually advantageous. This pragmatic outlook empowers informed decision-making, enhancing the global rule of law's predictability, efficiency, and integrity. The ultimate goal is strengthening the WTO's dispute resolution framework and ISDS mechanism, contributing to a more streamlined and cohesive international dispute resolution landscape. The qualitative research methodology has been applied to the following article.
30 September 2022 in Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
As the recovery of the Calvo Doctrine is becoming more and more apparent, the reform practice of the investment dispute settlement mechanism is also affected. The world's major economies have practiced different reform models according to their actual conditions, broadly categorized into the radical abandonment model represented by Latin American countries, the partial improvement model represented by the United States, and the institutional innovation model represented by the European Union. The essence of the Calvo Doctrine's "non-intervention" core corresponds to the field of investment dispute settlement, which is mainly reflected in the host country's opposition to the superior treatment of foreign investors over domestic investors, thus excluding investment disputes from being handled by international investment arbitration bodies. China, as the initiator of the "One Belt, One Road" initiative, should follow the trend of Calvo Doctrine recovery in the current reform of the investment dispute settlement mechanism, re-examine the international investment arbitration mechanism based on dialectical analysis of different reform proposals of various economies, explore and build a preventive and alternative approach based on investment dispute prevention and dispute mediation, and respond to the needs of the international community. To address the crisis of the legitimacy of the current investment arbitration under the revival of the Calvo Doctrine, we will explore the investment dispute settlement mechanism under the "One Belt, One Road" initiative from a new perspective with a distinctive Chinese solution.