[1] Most BITs grant investments—made by an investor of one Contracting State in the territory of the other—a number of guarantees, which typically include fair and equitable treatment, protection from expropriation, free transfer of means and full protection and security.
[2] The distinctive feature of many BITs is that they allow for an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, whereby an investor whose rights under the BIT have been violated could have recourse to international arbitration, often under the auspices of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), rather than suing the host State in its own courts.
[6] and in recent years, the number of bilateral investment treaties and preferential trade agreements, in particular, has grown at a torrid pace; practically every country is a member of at least one.
[10]: 104 As part of the effort to reform substantive standards of investment protection, states have sought to introduce the right to regulate into their new BITs.
Whilst preliminary objections by states are becoming more common in cases instituted under BITs,[13] NGOs have spoken against the use of BITs - stating that they are essentially designed to protect foreign investors and do not take into account obligations and standards to protect the environment, labour rights, social provisions or natural resources.