Acadexon

Academic Catalogue of Legal Research

Journal article Open access

Where Regimes Meet: Human Rights and International Investment Law at the Point of Expropriation

By Mona Modaresrad, Majid Ghamami

Law and World · Vol. 12, No. 38, pp. 65-82 · 2026

Access

Visit official source

lawandworld.ge

View full text

Open access

Acadexon indexes bibliographic metadata and links to the publisher. The full text is not stored here, and copyright remains with the authors, publishers or other rights holders.

Abstract

Contemporary international law increasingly rejects the notion of autonomous legal regimes, favoring a pluralist order grounded in normative interaction. Within this framework, international investment law (IIL) emerges, not as an autonomous, but as a specialized regime embedded in public international law and operating in normative interaction with other regimes, particularly international human rights law (IHRL). The doctrine of expropriation constitutes the central interface between these regimes, where the protection of foreign investors’ property intersects with states’ sovereign regulatory authority in pursuit of public welfare and human rights obligations.

This article examines expropriation through the distinction between a priori rights, grounded in human dignity and justice, and posteriori treaty-based protection emanating from state consent. It argues that prevailing arbitral jurisprudence has predominantly privileged proprietary interests through compensation-centered reasoning, often marginalizing broader public-law values embedded in IHRL. The result is a legitimacy deficit, especially in expropriation cases involving states’ regulatory measures.

This article contends that existing analyses remain incomplete because they focus predominantly on legality rather than legitimacy. In response, it advances a legitimacy-oriented framework grounded in proportionality and systemic integration. This methodology seeks to balance investors’ economic interests with states’ regulatory powers in furtherance of development and public welfare objectives. Recognizing a priori normative status of human rights does not undermine investor protection; rather, it requires recalibrating such protection within a coherent public international law framework. Ultimately, the legitimacy of expropriation adjudication lies not in hierarchical regime prioritization, but in public law methodology capable of reconciling property protection with human-rights-based state regulation.

Details

Publication type
Journal article
Author
  • Mona Modaresrad - Ph.D in International Trade and Foreign Investment Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
  • Majid Ghamami - Ph.D in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Journal
Law and World
Publication
June 30, 2026
Volume
12
Issue
38
Pages
65-82
Language
English
DOI
10.36475/12.2.4
ISSN
2346-7916
Institutions
University of Tehran
Access
Open access
Licence
CC BY-SA 4.0
Added to catalogue
Metadata source
Supplied by the publisher

Areas of law

Public International Law

Keywords

Expropriation human rights legitimacy Property rights proportionality

Cite this record

Modaresrad, M., & Ghamami, M. (2026). Where Regimes Meet: Human Rights and International Investment Law at the Point of Expropriation. Law and World, 12(38), 65-82. https://doi.org/10.36475/12.2.4
Modaresrad, Mona and Majid Ghamami. "Where Regimes Meet: Human Rights and International Investment Law at the Point of Expropriation." Law and World 12, no. 38 (2026): 65-82. https://doi.org/10.36475/12.2.4.
@article{modaresrad2026_88nwt5,
  title     = {Where Regimes Meet: Human Rights and International Investment Law at the Point of Expropriation},
  author    = {Modaresrad, Mona and Ghamami, Majid},
  year      = {2026},
  journal   = {Law and World},
  volume    = {12},
  number    = {38},
  pages     = {65--82},
  doi       = {10.36475/12.2.4},
  issn      = {2346-7916},
  language  = {en},
  url       = {https://lawandworld.ge/index.php/law/article/view/1004},
  note      = {Open access}
}
Download BibTeX 
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Modaresrad, Mona
AU  - Ghamami, Majid
TI  - Where Regimes Meet: Human Rights and International Investment Law at the Point of Expropriation
PY  - 2026
JO  - Law and World
VL  - 12
IS  - 38
SN  - 2346-7916
DO  - 10.36475/12.2.4
LA  - en
UR  - https://lawandworld.ge/index.php/law/article/view/1004
AB  - Contemporary international law increasingly rejects the notion of autonomous legal regimes, favoring a pluralist order grounded in normative interaction. Within this framework, international investment law (IIL) emerges, not as an autonomous, but as a specialized regime embedded in public international law and operating in normative interaction with other regimes, particularly international human rights law (IHRL). The doctrine of expropriation constitutes the central interface between these regimes, where the protection of foreign investors’ property intersects with states’ sovereign regulatory authority in pursuit of public welfare and human rights obligations. This article examines expropriation through the distinction between a priori rights, grounded in human dignity and justice, and posteriori treaty-based protection emanating from state consent. It argues that prevailing arbitral jurisprudence has predominantly privileged proprietary interests through compensation-centered reasoning, often marginalizing broader public-law values embedded in IHRL. The result is a legitimacy deficit, especially in expropriation cases involving states’ regulatory measures. This article contends that existing analyses remain incomplete because they focus predominantly on legality rather than legitimacy. In response, it advances a legitimacy-oriented framework grounded in proportionality and systemic integration. This methodology seeks to balance investors’ economic interests with states’ regulatory powers in furtherance of development and public welfare objectives. Recognizing a priori normative status of human rights does not undermine investor protection; rather, it requires recalibrating such protection within a coherent public international law framework. Ultimately, the legitimacy of expropriation adjudication lies not in hierarchical regime prioritization, but in public law methodology capable of reconciling property protection with human-rights-based state regulation.
KW  - Expropriation
KW  - human rights
KW  - legitimacy
KW  - Property rights
KW  - proportionality
KW  - ექსპროპრიაცია
KW  - ადამიანის უფლებები
KW  - ლეგიტიმურობა
KW  - საკუთრების უფლება
KW  - პროპორციულობა
SP  - 65
EP  - 82
ER  -
Download RIS

Generated from the metadata stored in this record. Please verify against the published version before citing.

Related research

Discussion

No comments yet · Comments are discussion only. They do not change the bibliographic record.

Sign in to join the discussion.

No comments yet. Start the discussion.