Author
Ms Soumya Rajsingh
Organisation/Institution
South Asian University
Country
INDIA
Panel
International Investment Law
Title
Addressing Modern Slavery Through Human Rights Counterclaims in South Asian Investment Agreements: Rethinking Investor Accountability in International Investment Law
Abstract
Abstract International Investment Law (IIL) has long faced criticism for privileging foreign investors while restricting the regulatory autonomy of host states. International Investment Agreements (IIAs), particularly through Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, offer broad protections to investors but often impede states from enacting regulations in the public interest, including those aimed at upholding human rights. This structural imbalance, rooted in the neoliberal design of IIL, instrumentalizes law to facilitate investment flows at the expense of human and social rights. Tribunal practice further reinforces this asymmetry, as illustrated in Glencore v. Bolivia, where Bolivia’s human rights-based defences were dismissed due to the narrow scope of the applicable BIT. Within this constrained regulatory space, modern slavery encompassing forced labour, human trafficking, and forced marriage emerges as an urgent but under-addressed human rights challenge. According to the Walk Free Foundation, India alone accounts for 11 million people living in conditions of modern slavery, the highest globally. As global supply chains expand and multinational corporations grow in influence, foreign investors may be directly or indirectly complicit in such violations. Yet the current IIL framework provides no effective mechanism to hold investors accountable. Recent reform efforts, such as those by UNCITRAL Working Group III, propose counterclaim mechanisms within ISDS, enabling host states to assert claims against investors for human rights violations. However, activating these counterclaims remains procedurally difficult due to narrowly worded dispute resolution clauses, questions of admissibility, and the absence of explicit investor obligations in most IIAs. Even where tribunals acknowledge jurisdiction, counterclaims often fail due to the lack of a legal basis within the IIA. This paper explores the potential of human rights counterclaims as a mechanism to address investor complicity in modern slavery. Focusing specifically on post-2008 South Asian IIAs, which increasingly include provisions affirming state regulatory autonomy, this research investigates whether these agreements offer space for constructing counterclaims related to modern slavery. Through doctrinal analysis of tribunal decisions and treaty language, the paper assesses the viability of using counterclaims to rebalance investor-state dynamics and enhance investor accountability in the context of human rights. Key Words: International Investment Law, International Investment Agreements, Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Modern Slavery, Investor Obligations
Biography
I am a final-year Ph.D. scholar at the Faculty of Legal Studies, South Asian University, New Delhi, working under the supervision of Dr. Sai Ramani Garimella. My research critically examines the social accountability and human rights obligations of investors within the international investment law framework, with a focus on South Asia. I previously served as Assistant Professor of Law at Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad. In 2025, I was awarded the fully funded UNIDROIT Visiting Research Fellowship in Rome. My work has been published in the Journal of International Trade Law and Policy (Emerald) and the International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics (Taylor & Francis), and I have presented at international conferences hosted by the Asian Society of International Law, the University of Sydney, and Maastricht University.
