International Arbitration ♦ Note 65 Va. J. Int’l L. 333 (2025)

Calvo, Correísmo, and Consent: The Causes and Consequences of Ecuador’s On-again, Off-again Relationship with ISDS

ZACH ZAMOFF

Ecuador has been the first country to ratify the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention, originally ratified in 1966), subsequently denounce the ICSID Convention (which took effect in 2010), and then ratify it again (in 2021). As such, Ecuador provides an interesting case study of both the shifting political, ideological, and economic influences on a country’s positions towards investor-state arbitration and of the consequences that such shifting positions entail for investors and states. Why did Ecuador ratify the ICSID Convention, then denounce it and all its bilateral investment treaties (BITs)? What is the rhetoric that those opposed to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) have deployed in Ecuador? Does this rhetoric ultimately impact investors’ legal claims? If states consent to BITs—which provide for ICSID arbitration—that remain in effect after a state’s denunciation of ICSID, does ICSID still have jurisdiction over investors’ postdenunciation claims? What might Ecuador’s experience show about the future of investorstate arbitration in Latin America?