
Itinerary
Join us for a day packed with debates, discussions and presentations from leading Arbitrators and international trade dispute resolution experts from around the world.
8:00 – 8:35 a.m.
Registration and networking
Light breakfast
8:35 – 8:55 a.m.
Welcome remarks & MIAS Writing Competition winner announcement
Silvia Marchili, MIAS Conference Committee Chair and Partner, White & Case
Katharine Menéndez de la Cuesta, MIAS Chair and Partner, Holland & Knight
8:55 – 9:45 a.m.
Panel Discussion: Fault Lines and Front Lines: Latin America’s Shifting Geopolitics and the Future of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
As Latin America navigates rising populism, resource nationalism, social unrest, and a renewed push for regional autonomy, the impact on investor-State dispute settlement is profound. This panel explores how evolving political ideologies, regulatory overhauls, and grassroots movements are reshaping the contours of ISDS and triggering new waves of disputes.
Moderator: Daniel González, Partner, Hogan Lovells LLC US
9:45 -11:15 a.m.
1st debate proposition: Tribunals should consider the political context of the Governments’ conduct, such as political instability, social unrest, or economic crises, as mitigating factors when determining a State’s responsibility for breaches of international law.
This debate will tackle whether tribunals should account for geopolitical pressures when determining a State’s responsibility for breaches of international law. Proponents will argue that fairness and legitimacy require sensitivity to a State’s broader context. Opponents will warn against diluting legal standards and undermining investor protections. The goal of the debate will be to test the boundaries between law and politics in ISDS.
Moderator: TBD
For the proposition:
Catalina Echeverri Gallego, Partner, Paris, Wordstone
Juan Felipe Merizalde, Partner, Adell & Merizalde
Against the proposition:
TBD
11:15 – 11:45 a.m
Coffee break and networking
11:45 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
2nd debate proposition: The Full Protection and Security standard demands a baseline of physical and legal protection that cannot be excused by political considerations or undermined by an investor’s alleged failure to conduct due diligence.
This debate will explore how the FPS standard has evolved from a narrow focus on physical security to a broader one of legal, institutional, and commercial security. In an era marked by political upheaval and volatility across Latin America, should tribunals excuse State failures on the basis of geopolitical constraints, or hold them to an irreducible standard of protection? Proponents will argue that FPS must guarantee a core level of protection regardless of surrounding instability (e.g. provide basic State functions like the exercise of police power), and that investors should not be penalized for failing to predict or navigate dysfunctions. Opponents will contend that both context and investor due diligence matter, and that tribunals should not ignore the complex realities that many States face and the competing interests they must balance.
Moderator: Estefania San Juan, Partner, White & Case
For the proposition:
Juliana de Valdenebro, Senior Associate, Hogan Lovells LLC US
Patrick Pearsall, Partner, Gibson Dunn
Against the proposition:
Fernando Tupa, Partner, Curtis Mallet Prevost Colt & Mosle
Ana Maria Ordoñez, Counsel, Dispute Resolution & Intl. Arbitration, Martinez Quintero Mendoza Gomez Laguada de la Rosa (MFMGLD)
1:15 – 2:45 p.m.
Lunch and Keynote "In conversation"
Introduction by Silvia Marchili, MIAS Conference Committee Chair; Partner, White & Case
2:45– 3:15 p.m
Coffee and dessert
3:15 – 4:45 p.m.
Tylney Hall-style symposium
4:45 – 4:55 p.m.
Closing remarks
Francisco Rodriguez, Chair-Elect, MIAS; Partner, Reed Smith
Join us! It's going to be a great day!
2025 Sponsors
Thank You
GOLD SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS

BRONZE SPONSORS


Supporting Organizations
