Despite advancements in the disciplines of business and human rights regarding corporate responsibility for human rights, the determination of the responsibilities of foreign investors with respect to human rights remains mostly unchanged. The notion that companies should uphold human rights is deeply ingrained in international law and is predicated on what society expects from companies operating in the twenty-first century. International investment law remains mute on the subject, even though it is widely acknowledged. This creates a gap between public international law rules governing corporations' human rights responsibilities and international investment law norms. One way to better integrate international investment legislation with the progress of the business and human rights movement is to provide investor commitments for human rights. These responsibilities can be found in both non-treaty sources and investment treaties. Furthermore, investment arbitration gives tribunals a variety of ways to assess these duties, including through jurisdictional, admissibility, and counterclaims. The introduction of investor obligations for human rights has two main advantages. First, it can serve as a means of enforcing general business and human rights rules. Second, and perhaps more significantly, establishing investor responsibilities for human rights can aid in providing a more accurate framework for interpreting international investment agreements. The introduction of such responsibilities serves as a useful tool in reminding arbitrators that human rights and other non-investment concerns are part of the framework within which international investment law operates.

Keywords: Investment, Law, Human Rights, China, USA, Nepal, Uganda, Iran.