That question raises issues that range from the ICSID annulment mechanism to the perception of ICSID arbitration by certain states, to the fundamental question of whether ICSID arbitration is any longer the "preferred method" of resolving investor-State disputes.

Our two authors have provided thoughtful, and having read the papers, at times provocative contribution to these questions that are likely to lead to very lively debates.

Let me introduce our speakers: Our first author is Sylvia Tonova. Sylvia is an attorney in Washington, D.C. at the office of White & Case and practices with the international arbitration and litigation groups. She concentrates her practice on the representation of sovereign states and private clients in investment treaty and commercial arbitrations. Our second author, who could not be here, Freya Baetens, has rather dangerously asked Todd to present her paper on her behalf.

MR. VASANI: Freya is an Assistant Professor of public international law at Leiden University. She’s an Executive Board member of the Society of International Economic Law and Fellow of the Center for International Sustainable Development Law.

Our panelists really need no introduction and will be known to most of you. To my immediate left is Margrete Stevens. She’s a consultant in King & Spalding’s office in Washington, D.C. working on investment treaty claims for the firm’s leading international arbitration group. As you all know, prior to joining King & Spalding, she worked for nearly 20 years at ICSID, where she served primarily as senior counsel.