Symposium on International Investment Law & Contemporary Crises – Part 4 of 8
Central Banks as Players in Investment Treaty Disputes

When central banks act in times of crisis - who bears the legal consequences?

In this afternoon’s symposium contribution, Kiran Nasir Gore (The George Washington University Law School) explores a frequently overlooked actor in investor-State arbitration: the central bank.

From currency controls and deposit freezes to emergency interventions and sanctions compliance, central banks are often the functional decision-makers behind measures that later become the subject of investment treaty claims.

Drawing on the BIICL empirical study, the piece highlights:

- How central bank decisions on exchange rates, liquidity and financial stabilisation can trigger ISDS claims
- The jurisdictional hurdles investors must overcome, including the Salini test
- Argentina’s 2001 crisis as a defining example of central bank-driven disputes
- Emerging risks linked to digital currencies and next-generation financial regulation

As central banks expand their remit into digital currencies and new regulatory frameworks, the intersection between monetary policy and investment treaty protections is likely to grow more complex—and more litigated.

The key insight? Central banks are not merely background institutions in crisis responses. Their actions can shape—and sometimes determine—the trajectory of international investment disputes.

Read the full contribution here: https://lnkd.in/eqBc8WdE