James DayFollow


This paper turns to the popular field of international investment law, but rather than assessing the consequences of the various bilateral and free trade agreements that dominate this area, it looks at how these agreements are made. Particularly, in an area that is perceived as wanting in legitimacy, it analyses the structures that are involved in making these agreements and assesses them against principles of participatory democracy. Using three participatory sub-principles of openness, inclusiveness and responsiveness as benchmarks, it comments on just how involved the people of the EU and Australia are in making their respective international investment law policies. It uses the recent and ongoing TTIP and TTP negotiations as principal case studies.

Ultimately, it concludes that, while both subjects inherit strong foundations for the participation of its people and their processes are not as dismissive as is perhaps publicly perceived, both have a way to go in being truly participatory.