it could jeopardize the city’s status as a World Heritage Site.6 In an increasingly dynamic and intertwined international legal arena, Home international investment arbitration proceedings involving cultural heritage Editorial no longer come as a surprise. Cultural heritage sites, buildings, and pieces are unique and irreplaceable traces of Insight When arbitration is not humanity’s culture and history that can be voluntary: the case of Mutu threatened by a myriad of circumstances, and Pechstein v. Switzerland including the incorrect interpretation of international law. As the analysed awards Global Briefing indicate, arbitrators have aptly balanced The impact of The Belt and states’ BIT obligations with international Road Initiative on investment arbitration cultural heritage rights and duties. However, the Elitech case shows that “What’s in a name?”: NAFTA more cases involving cultural heritage are to USMCA and what this change means for investment to be expected in the future. In this line, protection In an increasingly dynamic and In Focus In Glamis Gold v United States, a In the end, the mining company’s Cultural Heritage mining project was affected by claims were rejected by the tribunal intertwined international legal arena, Considerations in measures adopted to protect the because it acknowledged the cultural International Investment international investment arbitration Arbitration trail of dreams, a trail of religious and and religious relevance of the site, cultural importance to the Quechan concluding that the measure adopted proceedings involving cultural heritage Smart Contracts and People, a Native American tribe. was fairly associated with the public International Arbitration: During the proceedings it was pointed purpose of protecting the trail no longer come as a surprise Friends or Foes? out that the trail had the same religious of dreams.5 The Achmea decision: relevance as Jerusalem or Mecca and, resort- has been arbitrarily affected arbitrators must endeavour to properly significant uncertainties linger in this context, the tribunal analysed There is currently an ongoing ICSID by Croatia. On the other hand, it has research and apply international cultural the relevance and applicability of the arbitration involving relevant cultural been reported that Croatia contends heritage law when, paraphrasing the Investment Arbitration: World Heritage Convention. Despite heritage issues. InElitech and Razvoj that NGOs have filed an administrative Glamis award, the challenged measures Contact Lawyers the fact that the trail of dreams was v. Croatia the claimants argue that claim against the project because are reasonably linked to the public not on the World Heritage List, the their project -the construction of a golf it could potentially affect the Old purpose of protecting cultural heritage. tribunal held that it could still be City of Dubrovnik -a landmark of the considered to have outstanding 5 Glamis Gold, Ltd. v. The United States of America,Mediterranean sea coast and a World UNCITRAL case, Award, ¶¶ 84, 111, 166-177 (8 June 2009). 6 Elitech B.V. and Razvoj Golf D.O.O. v. Republic of universal value and, therefore, the For further comments, see S. Green Martínez, CulturalHeritage Site- and that in a non-binding Croatia (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/32). See IAReporter, World Heritage Convention should Heritage Challenges in Investment Arbitration: Reviewreferendum 85% of the voters voted Balkans Round-Up: new disputes for Albania and Croatia; at least be taken into consideration. of Cultural Heritage in International Investment Law andagainst the project because, allegedly,updates on other pending investor-state arbitrations in the Arbitration, 50(2) Israel Law Review 227 (2017) 233. region (20 February 2017). www.uria.com 15