Essential Security Interests in International Investment Law—A Trend towards GATTization

Of the several issues that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) dealt with in the recent Certain Iranian Assets case (Iran v United States),2 one of them was related to essential security interests. This dispute arose due to the United States (US) imposing various legislative and judicial measures against Iran because the former believed that the latter acted against the Treaty of Amity3 signed between the two countries.4 An important question before the ICJ was whether the actions of the US—blocking all assets of the Iranian government5—was necessary to protect its essential security interests under Article XX(1)(d) of the Treaty of Amity.6 Article XX(1)(d) of the Treaty of Amity provides as follows: The present Treaty shall not preclude the application of measures: (d) necessary to fulfil the obligations of a High Contracting Party for the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security, or necessary to protect its essential security interests.