Balancing international financial institutions’ immunity with private individuals’ right to effective remedy

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article focuses on the immunity of international financial institutions (IFIs) by advocating for a balancing mechanism between the obligation to provide legal remedy to private individuals and the immunity of IFIs. In seeking to balance these conflicting interests and to ensure that neither is undermined, the article examined the doctrine of IFIs’ immunity vis-à-vis the fundamental right to effective remedy. It examined the nature of IFIs’ immunity as well as the arguments for and against it. Using the recent US Supreme Court’s decision in Jam v International Finance Corporation, it argues that the existing dispute resolution mechanisms of the IFIs are inadequate to provide for meaningful remedy to project-affected individuals. The article concludes by advocating for the use of domestic courts to close the accountability gap when IFIs operate in situations where the IFIs cannot provide an effective remedy to project-affected individuals.