When the international investment law and environmental law are in crossroads: how to protect investors and environment in tobacco control case
E Latifah1,4, M N Imanullah2 and I R Angelia3
1International Law Department, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A, Surakarta, Indonesia.
2Civil Law Department, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A, Surakarta, Indonesia.
3Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36A, Surakarta, Indonesia.
4Corresponding author: email@example.com
Abstract. The focus of the research is to address question on the problem of how the chasm between international investment law and environmental law can be filled in, especially in tobacco control through enacting the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 adopted by Australia. Australia, as the first country to enact the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011, was sued by many cigarette companies. They consider Australia does not protect their interests as investors. While one of the reasons why Australia enforces these rules is to protect the environment, in this matter is public health of the society, and both are closely correlate with climate change. From this case, there is difference views between international investment law and environmental law. On the one hand, the principles of international investment law require protection of foreign investors, while the principles of environmental law require the states to provide an adequate protection on its environment. This research is a normative legal research. Data is secondary ones consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Data collection techniques uses library research, while data analysis technique uses legal interpretation. The result of this study show that it is needed to establish a new approach in balancing between economic interest and public
health one that can contribute to the climate change through drafting provision relating to the environmental issues in bilateral investment treaty (BIT).