Citizenship of a private investor: problems of determining state affiliation

The relevance of the article is conditioned by the necessity to study the problem of determining the national affiliation of a private investor in the presence of dual or multiple citizenship, issues of qualification of such person as a foreign investor, which directly affects the investor’s ability to initiate consideration of a dispute against the host state in the international investment arbitration court. The subject of the article is a study of the arbitration practice of considering investment disputes under the ICSID rules and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, in particular, on the question of whether an investor with citizenship of the States parties to an investment agreement has the right to apply to the court with claims against the host state, provided that there is no condition in the investment agreement resolving the issue of citizenship according to which criteria, when considering investment disputes, arbitration courts apply the rule of effective citizenship in determining jurisdiction, and whether the investor should prove the existence of stronger ties with the state of origin. The topic reflects the problem of determining the investor’s state affiliation when the latter has two or more nationalities when considering disputes arising from investment relations. The aim is to analyze the differences between the rules of ICSID and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules concerning the determination of an investor’s citizenship according to the principle of effective nationality, the implications for the competence of arbitration courts, and the conclusions regarding which provisions on establishing an investor’s state affiliation should be included in the investment agreement, taking into account the ICSID rules, the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and national legislation governing citizenship issues. The methodology employed includes comparative, formal-legal, and analytical methods.