Amicus Curiae and Public Welfare:

Bridging the Gap Between Legal Expertise and Public Interest in Investment Arbitration

Adaeze Agatha Aniodoh

 

ABSTRACT: The growing prominence of investment arbitration as a mechanism for resolving disputes between foreign investors and host states has raised important questions regarding the accessibility and inclusivity of the process. This article explores the role of amicus curiae (friend of the court' briefs) in bridging the gap between legal expertise and public interest, particularly in the context of investment arbitration. It examines how amicus curiae interventions enable non-disputing parties, such as non-governmental organisations, advocacy groups, and experts, to offer perspectives on issues that extend beyond the immediate interests of the parties involved, thus contributing to the broader public welfare. By analysing case studies and regulatory frameworks across jurisdictions, the article investigates the impact of amicus curiae on enhancing the transparency, legitimacy, and fairness of investment arbitration. It also considers the challenges associated with its use, including the potential for overrepresentation of certain interests and the complexities of balancing diverse voices within the arbitral process. Ultimately, the article argues that amicus curiae can play a crucial role in ensuring that investment arbitration remains responsive to public concerns, fostering a more equitable system that reflects the interests of both investors and the wider public, but must be approached with caution so as not to unduly burden an otherwise delicate dispute framework.