Le Régime juridique des investissements étrangers face aux risques politiques : Cas inspiré du Traité d'investissement entre le Mali et le Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis deals with the legal framework of foreign investment in the face of political risks which are ravaging the African continent in general and Mali in particular. An emphasis is placed on the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of Mali for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments. I will be discussing and comparing the provisions of that agreement with those contained in other bilateral investment treaties. Mali's political situation is the basis of the criticisms of some of the clauses of the Agreement, namely the compensation of losses clause. The latter limits its scope only to situations of armed conflict, civil war or disaster. However, the political and security environment of Mali is tempered by other exceptional situations likely to affect the serenity of Canadian investors, namely: civil strife, the revolutions, revolts, terrorism, etc. However, these exceptional situations are listed in the compensation of losses clause contained in the Treaty of investment between Canada and Russia and other bilateral treaties to which Canada is a party. Besides, the foreign investors covered by this thesis are limited to transnational corporations, thus excluding natural persons and unincorporated enterprises. Hence, transnational corporations are legal persons, which are endowed with a legal personality distinct from one of their members (directors, officers, shareholders). Theoretically, awarding legal persons fundamental rights does not normally cause a problem. However, the enjoyment of some of those rights may seem problematic in practice because of the technical and non-organic nature of legal persons. Thus, a consensus exists within the legal world that public international law assigns the rights and imposes obligations on non-State entities, in this case transnational corporations. This raises the fundamental question of whether transnational corporations are subjects of public international law. Regardless of the positions of one or the other, the status quo tilts in favor of the enactment of a binding legal instrument to frame in a uniform manner the practices of transnational corporations throughout the world. This is necessary because their rights and obligations or responsibilities are hitherto governed by a mosaic of texts, whose contents are not uniform. More precisely, they are governed by investment treaties between States, investment contracts between an investor and a host State, general regime of public international law, as well as internal law rules of the host State to an investor. It goes without saying that the respect for human rights and environmental standards, as well as an efficient protection of foreign investments against different risks, can no longer be solely accommodated only by the legal regimes mentioned above.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".