In today's world of international economic integration, foreign investment is an important element of countries' economic development. International law in this area has to come to terms with, on one hand, the effort of the host country to attract foreign investors by providing investors with an attractive investment environment and on the other the need to preserve sovereignty of the host country. The thesis aims to offer an overview of the issue of regulation of foreign investment protection at the international level and focuses, within selected problems, on the interaction of agreements on the protection of foreign investment and EU law after passage of foreign direct investment within the exclusive competence of the European Union. For the purpose of fulfilling the objective of this paper the author used general theoretical knowledge and used descriptive and comparative methods and analogy. The work consists of three chapters, each of which is divided into subsections. The first chapter - Introduction presents the issue of protection of foreign investment. The second chapter, entitled Agreements on the protection of foreign investment and EU law focuses on selected aspects of the interaction of international investment agreements and EU law. In subsection 2.1 entitled International Investment...

Le débat portant sur la relation entre la protection des droits de l'homme et la protection des investissements étrangers n’est pas nouveau. Quand cette dernière et la protection des droits de l'homme des peuples locaux s'opposent, quelle solution le régime du droit de l'investissement devrait-il proposer? Est-il possible d'inclure la protection des droits de l'homme des investisseurs étrangers dans le régime du droit international de l'investissement? Il faudrait trouver le moyen de rendre le régime du droit international de l'investissement compatible avec le régime du droit international des droits de l'homme. C'est le problème principal que cette thèse souhaite traiter. Je propose d'inclure la protection des droits de l'homme par le biais de la clause du traitement juste et équitable (TJE) dans les TBI. Le sens littéral du TJE est de donner aux investisseurs étrangers le traitement qu'ils méritent. Cela veut dire que l'on ne devrait leur donner ni plus ni moins que ce qu'ils méritent. On leur donne plus quand leur investissement est protégé sans que l'on accorde l'attention qui lui revient à la protection des droits de l'homme des peuples locaux. En même temps, les investisseurs étrangers méritent un environnement d'investissement dans lequel leurs droits de l'homme sont respectés. Pour l'argument de la cohérence, on a pu voir que le TJE était en général la mise en œuvre de l'état de droit. Les investisseurs étrangers méritent un environnement d'investissement où l'état de droit existe. L'état de droit inclut la protection des droits de l'homme. Les investisseurs étrangers méritent un environnement d'investissement où les droits de l'homme sont protégés. / The relationship between human rights protection and foreign investment protection has been an issue that has been widely discussed. When the foreign investment protection and the human rights protection of local people conflicts, how should the investment law regime solve the problem? Moreover, is it possible that foreign investors' human rights protection be included in the international investment law regime? The international investment law regime should find a way to make itself compatible with international human rights law regime. The aforementioned is the major issue that this thesis intends to address. I have proposed to include human rights protection through the fair and equitable treatment (FET) clause in BITs. The literal meaning of FET is to give foreign investors the treatment that they deserve. This means that foreign investors should not be given neither less than they deserve, nor more than they deserve. Foreign investors were given more than they deserve when their investment were protected without giving due regard to local people's human rights protection. Meanwhile, foreign investors deserve an investment environment where their human rights are protected. For the coherence argument, FET is generally the implementation of the rule of law. In its interpretation, there is a presupposed warrant. The warrant is "foreign investors deserve an investment environment where rule of law is implemented." Foreign investors deserve an investment environment where rule of law is implemented. Rule of law includes the protection of human rights. Foreign investors therefore deserve an investment environment where the protection of human rights is implemented.