Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all the witnesses for being here.
Dr. Van Harten, I know that you've done a lot of research on the investor-state dispute resolution system. We've already heard from you and other people that India is one of the few countries of the world that is now opposed to including investor-state provisions in their trade agreements. I think they join other countries like South Korea and Australia. I know that Canada of course has been pursuing and in fact has been the demander of such provisions as a standard feature in our trade agreements. I want to drill into a bit of the ISDS mechanism.
My understanding, of course, is that an investor who believes that their rights have been violated under the agreement would then take their case not to the domestic courts of either jurisdiction, but rather to an ad hoc panel of three international trade lawyers that is set up. That's usually who it is. I'm just wondering about it. When they make a decision, where does an appeal of that decision lie? Should the country be aggrieved or not like the decision, or even if the investor doesn't like the decision, to whom do you appeal?