Is Calvo dead?

This article evaluates whether and to what extent the Calvo Doc-trine is dead by examining relevant international treaty practices and domestic legislation in Latin American states. It concludes that, con-trary to what is often believed or assumed, Calvo is not completely dead, but has largely been deactivated. More precisely, Calvo is still alive respecting rejection of diplomatic protection, yet in other ways is greatly transformed; Calvo has converged with investment treaties on the national treatment standard requirement, and has been greatly eroded and largely discarded on the exclusive national jurisdiction and national law requirements. When political and economic climates are "right," the Calvo Doctrine could well be re-activated and "re-surge," as seems to be happening currently. The "death" of the Calvo Doctrine is not at all a new topic. As early as 1955, Shea had pronounced its death because the Doctrine "failed to receive recognition as a principle of international law," by which he meant recognition by Western Countries.¹ In the mid-1990s, the "imminent death" of this doctrine was again declared due to changing attitudes in Latin American states towards foreign in-vestment as witnessed in their international and domestic law mak-ing practice.² Now that ten years have passed, have the predictions of "imminent death" come true? This study shows that Calvo is not completely dead, even though it has been, by and large, deactivated. The article has four Parts. Part I explores the essence and ele-ments of the doctrine, thus setting forth the criteria for assessment; Part II introduces the broader background of the attitude changes in Latin America towards foreign investment and arbitration since the 1980s. Parts III and IV examine international treaty practices and domestic legislation, with a view toward assessing whether and to what extent the Calvo Doctrine is dead. Part V summarizes and con-cludes the article.