<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">kulawr</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Kutafin Law Review</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Kutafin Law Review</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2713-0525</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2713-0533</issn><publisher><publisher-name>MSAL</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17803/2713-0533.2024.3.29.534-568</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">kulawr-347</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>SHANGHAI COOPERATION ORGANIZATION</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>China and Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Reconsideration and Improvement of Multilateralizing Effect of Most Favored Nation Clause in BIT</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title></trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0953-7560</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Yanyan</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Ren Yanyan, PhD, Assistant researcher</p><p>Shanghai</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">renyanyan@shupl.edu.cn</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1268-162X</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Zhixin</surname><given-names>Zh.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Zhao Zhixin, Master of International Law</p><p>Shanghai</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">asistoxin@163.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-2"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff xml:lang="en" id="aff-1"><institution>China National Institute for SCO International Exchange and Judicial Cooperation</institution><country>China</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en" id="aff-2"><institution>Shanghai University of Political Science and Law</institution><country>China</country></aff><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2024</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>17</day><month>10</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>11</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>534</fpage><lpage>568</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Yanyan R., Zhixin Z., 2024</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2024</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Yanyan R., Zhixin Z.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Yanyan R., Zhixin Z.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://kulawr.msal.ru/jour/article/view/347">https://kulawr.msal.ru/jour/article/view/347</self-uri><abstract><p>Since the Maffezini case, debates upon the application of the Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) clause have never stopped. Research from the perspective of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) can test the way for further advancement of this issue. The analysis on the international investment arbitration cases involving the SCO states may shed some light on the crucial point on dispute. At present, the bilateral investment treaties (BIT) between China and other states of the SCO are in an urgent need of renewal in order to meet the interests of deepening investment cooperation. Problems of fragmentation of the interpretation method and of unpredictability of the interpretation conclusion of the MFN clauses manifested in international investment disputes involving SCO states will provide concrete preventative suggestions on the updating of the wording of MFN clauses. Under SCO framework, the multilateral effect of the MFN clause can play a model role for other regional integration organizations to build an integrated and multilateral investment treatment system in the fragmented and bilateralism-based framework of international investment law, and in fact promote investment facilitation for regional organizations.</p></abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>bilateral investment treaty (BIT)</kwd><kwd>Most-FavoredNation (MFN) Treatment</kwd><kwd>Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)</kwd><kwd>Multilateralization</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><funding-statement xml:lang="en">The article was prepared with the financial support of the Ministry of Justice of the People’s Republic of China (project No. 22SFB1013)</funding-statement></funding-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Dolzer, R. and Schreuer, C., (2012). Principles of International Investment Law. Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dolzer, R. and Schreuer, C., (2012). Principles of International Investment Law. Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Garmoza, A.P., (2010). Extending Application of Most-Favored-Nation Treatment to Dispute Resolution Clauses of Investment Treaties. International Commercial Arbitration Review, 2 (2), pp. 12–29.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Garmoza, A.P., (2010). Extending Application of Most-Favored-Nation Treatment to Dispute Resolution Clauses of Investment Treaties. International Commercial Arbitration Review, 2 (2), pp. 12–29.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Huang, Y., (2022). Interpretation of International Investment Arbitration Treaties: Value Trade-off and Rule Construction. Commercial Arbitration and Mediation, 6, pp. 49–59.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Huang, Y., (2022). Interpretation of International Investment Arbitration Treaties: Value Trade-off and Rule Construction. Commercial Arbitration and Mediation, 6, pp. 49–59.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Jin, Y., (2020). Consistency of Treaty Interpretation in International Investment Dispute Settlement: Practice Conflict, Value Reflection and Reform Goal. Global Law Review, 5, pp. 178–192.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Jin, Y., (2020). Consistency of Treaty Interpretation in International Investment Dispute Settlement: Practice Conflict, Value Reflection and Reform Goal. Global Law Review, 5, pp. 178–192.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Mingxin, Zhu, (2015). Appearance and Essence of MFN Clause’s Application on Investment Dispute Settlement Procedure: from the Perspective of Treaty Interpretation. Law and Business Research, 3, pp. 171–183.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Mingxin, Zhu, (2015). Appearance and Essence of MFN Clause’s Application on Investment Dispute Settlement Procedure: from the Perspective of Treaty Interpretation. Law and Business Research, 3, pp. 171–183.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Mrisho, M.I., Tran, T.K.D., Ghani, H.U. and Kipanga, K.B., (2023). Investor-State Dispute Settlement and the Application of the Rule of Law under the ICSID Convention. US-China Law Review, 7, pp. 297–314.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Mrisho, M.I., Tran, T.K.D., Ghani, H.U. and Kipanga, K.B., (2023). Investor-State Dispute Settlement and the Application of the Rule of Law under the ICSID Convention. US-China Law Review, 7, pp. 297–314.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Perez-Aznar, F., (2017). The Use of Most-Favoured-Nation Clauses to Import Substantive Treaty Provisions in International Investment Agreements. Journal of International Economic Law, 4, pp. 777–806.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Perez-Aznar, F., (2017). The Use of Most-Favoured-Nation Clauses to Import Substantive Treaty Provisions in International Investment Agreements. Journal of International Economic Law, 4, pp. 777–806.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Qiao, J., (2011). Research on the Applicability of the MFN Clause in BITs in Dispute Settlement. Journal of Rule of Law, 1, pp. 61–69.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Qiao, J., (2011). Research on the Applicability of the MFN Clause in BITs in Dispute Settlement. Journal of Rule of Law, 1, pp. 61–69.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Schill, S.W., (2009). Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Though Most-Favored-Nation Clauses. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2, pp. 492–569.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Schill, S.W., (2009). Multilateralizing Investment Treaties Though Most-Favored-Nation Clauses. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2, pp. 492–569.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sharmin, T., (2018). Application of MFN to the Substantive Standards: Why Should We Re-Investigate the Uncontested? Manchester Journal of International Economic Law, 15, pp. 85–113.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sharmin, T., (2018). Application of MFN to the Substantive Standards: Why Should We Re-Investigate the Uncontested? Manchester Journal of International Economic Law, 15, pp. 85–113.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ustor, E., (1974). Fifth Report on the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur. New York, United Nations.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ustor, E., (1974). Fifth Report on the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause by Mr. Endre Ustor, Special Rapporteur. New York, United Nations.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wang, S., (2019). Legal Issues of Investment Facilitation in Shanghai Cooperation Organization. International Business Studies, 1, pp. 26–39.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wang, S., (2019). Legal Issues of Investment Facilitation in Shanghai Cooperation Organization. International Business Studies, 1, pp. 26–39.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wang, X., (2021). The Principle of Exhaustion of Local Remedies in the ISDS Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties between China and Five Central Asian States. Journal of Guangxi Social Sciences, 11, pp. 92–100.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wang, X., (2021). The Principle of Exhaustion of Local Remedies in the ISDS Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties between China and Five Central Asian States. Journal of Guangxi Social Sciences, 11, pp. 92–100.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wang, Y., (2020). From Procedural to Substantial: New Disputes on the Application Scope of MFN Treatment in International Investment Treaties. Tsinghua Law Journal, 5, pp. 182–207.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wang, Y., (2020). From Procedural to Substantial: New Disputes on the Application Scope of MFN Treatment in International Investment Treaties. Tsinghua Law Journal, 5, pp. 182–207.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wei, W., Sun, K., (2023). Study on the Eɤ ciency of China’s Direct Investment in Major SCO Countries. Northeast Asia Economic Research, 6, pp. 77–90, doi: 10.19643/j.cnki.naer.2023.06.007.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wei, W., Sun, K., (2023). Study on the Eɤ ciency of China’s Direct Investment in Major SCO Countries. Northeast Asia Economic Research, 6, pp. 77–90, doi: 10.19643/j.cnki.naer.2023.06.007.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Xu, S., (2013). “Bilateralism” and “Multilateralization” of International Investment Treaty Protection. Wuhan University Review of International Law, 16, pp. 256–278.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Xu, S., (2013). “Bilateralism” and “Multilateralization” of International Investment Treaty Protection. Wuhan University Review of International Law, 16, pp. 256–278.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Yannick, R., (2007). The Application of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties: Domesticating the “Trojan Horse.” The European Journal of International Law, 4, pp. 757–774.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Yannick, R., (2007). The Application of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties: Domesticating the “Trojan Horse.” The European Journal of International Law, 4, pp. 757–774.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
