The Draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor–State Dispute Settlement: A Low-hanging Fruit in the ISDS Reform Process.

First, in terms of the definition as to whom the Code applies, the second Draft of the Code specifies that "adjudicators" means "Arbitrator and Judge". Counsel, members of secretariats, experts and others who are involved in ISDS proceedings face a similar ethical uncertainties and conundrums as adjudicators.[28] Separate codification will be required to regulate their conduct as the process of ISDS reform continues. The Draft Code of Conduct for Adjudicators in Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is one of the most promising reform proposals presently discussed in Working Group III of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).[1] In a short period of time, the draft has already gained substantial interest and support among stakeholders, and adoption is likely in 2022.[2] In this article, I first put the Code in the larger context of the ISDS reform process, then explain its general content and highlight some of the main issues and related policy choices. Indeed, the absence of a common ISDS Code of Conduct is notable, as many domestic and international arbitral institutions and international courts have drafted their own ethical rules and specific codes for judges, counsel and other actors in international proceedings. [Extracted from the article]