Overview of Conciliation under the ICSID Convention
ICSID conciliation is a cooperative, non-adversarial dispute resolution process. The goal of the Conciliation Commission is to clarify the issues in dispute between the parties and to endeavor to bring about agreement on mutually acceptable terms. To that end, a Conciliation Commission may request relevant documents, hear witnesses, make site visits and issue recommendations to assist the parties in reaching mutually acceptable terms to resolve their dispute. Parties to conciliation proceedings are expected to cooperate in good faith with the Commission and seriously consider its recommendations.

An ICSID Convention conciliation proceeding is governed by:
The main steps in an ICSID Convention conciliation are depicted in the following flow chart.
Conduct of an ICSID Convention Conciliation
The ICSID Convention provides the framework for the conduct of a conciliation proceeding. The main procedural provisions are contained in Chapters III and V to VII of the Convention. These provisions cross-reference other provisions, such as Article 14(1) of the Convention concerning the required qualities of a conciliator. The conditions for jurisdiction are contained in Chapter II.
All provisions of the Convention are mandatory except when the Convention allows parties to agree otherwise. If a question of procedure arises which is not covered by the Convention or by the applicable Conciliation Rules, the Commission has discretion to decide the question (see Article 33 of the Convention).
The Institution Rules explain how to institute a conciliation proceeding, including the form and contents of the request for conciliation. They apply to the steps to be taken between filing a request for conciliation and dispatch of the notice of registration.
The Conciliation Rules govern the conciliation proceeding once a request for conciliation has been registered. They complement the ICSID Convention procedural provisions.
Article 33 of the ICSID Convention provides that conciliations will be conducted in accordance with the Conciliation Rules in effect on the date on which the parties consented to conciliation, except as the parties otherwise agree. The current rules came into effect on April 10, 2006: ICSID Conciliation Rules (2006).
The Administrative and Financial Regulations contain provisions concerning:
  • ICSID Review—Foreign Investment Law Journal, Vol. 29, No. 1 – Special Focus Issue on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Investment Disputes (2014)
    • Anna Joubin-Bret, and Barton Legum, A Set of Rules Dedicated to Investor-State Mediation; the IBA Investor-State Mediation Rules, pp. 17-24 (2014)
    • Susan D. Franck, Using Investor–State Mediation Rules to Promote Conflict Management: An Introductory Guide, pp. 66-89 (2014)
    • Jeremy Lack, Michael Leathes, and Wolf Juergen von Kumberg, Enabling Early Settlement in Investor-State Arbitration - The Time to Introduce Mediation Has Come, pp. 133-141
    • Frauke Nitschke, The IBA’s Investor–State Mediation Rules and the ICSID Dispute Settlement Framework, pp. 112-132
  • Fatma Khalifa, Mediation use in ISDS, Transnational Dispute Management, No. 1 (2014)
  • Antonio R. Parra, The History of ICSID, Oxford University Press (2012), pp. 35-36, 60-61, 71-73, 83-86, 108-111.
  • Gabriel Bottini, and Veronica Lavista, Conciliation and BITs, Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers 2009 (A. Rovine ed.), Brill, pp. 358-373 (2010)
  • Christoph H. Schreuer, Loretta Malintoppi, August Reinisch & Anthony Sinclair, Chapter III- Conciliation, The ICSID Convention: A Commentary (2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, p. 430 (2009)
  • Jack J. Coe, Toward a Complementary Use of Conciliation in Investor-State Disputes-A Preliminary Sketch, Transnational Dispute Management, No. 1 (2007)
  • Nassib G. Ziadé, ICSID Conciliation, News from ICSID, Vol. 13, No. 2, p. 3 (1996)
  • Lester Nurick, and Stephen J. Schnably, The First ICSID Conciliation: Tesoro Petroleum Corporation v. Trinidad and Tobago, ICSID Review—Foreign Investment Law Journal, Vol. 1, p. 340 (1986)