Over the past decade, the backlash against investment arbitration has become worldwide and correspondingly the investment treaty reform has been undertaken at multiple levels. In this context, a multilateral investment agreement (“MIA”) has been called for as a global effort to address the global backlash. Arguably, the current condition for a MIA might be more favorable than before, as the interests of developed countries and developing countries have changed. After examining the need of a MIA for the global backlash, this paper attempts to explore China’s recent practice in this aspect, including that (1) China’s changing interest in outward foreign direct investment and investment treaty practice reflect the changing landscape of international investment law; (2) the 2016 G20 under China’s presidency achieved the Guiding Principles for Global Investment Policymaking; and (3) China has joined to work on a multilateral framework on investment facilitation at the WTO.

I. Introduction
II. Perceived Drawbacks of the ICS IDAnnulment System
    A. Conflict of Values: Substantive Fairness v. Procedural Efficiency
    B. Current Situation of an Annulment System: Different ConclusionsMay Be Reached in Similar Cases
    C. Disputes on the Application of ICSID Article 52.1(b)
III. Interpretation of “the Arbitral TribunalManifestly Exceeded its Power
    A. The Ad hoc Committee’s interpretation of ‘manifestly’
    B. “Manifest Excess of Power” Reflected in “Defects in Jurisdiction”
    C. “Manifest Excess of Power” Reflected in “Application of Laws”
IV. Models of External Reforms of ICS IDArbitration Mechanism
    A. External Appeal System
    B. The Problems Revolving around the Establishment ofan Appellate System outside ICSID
V. Improvement within the ICS IDArbitration System
    A. Building an Appeal Mechanism within ICSID
    B. ‘Reparation’ of the present ICSID Remedy System
VI. Conclusion
References

• Junqing Chao(Faculty of Law of The University of Hong Kong. LL.B. (ECUPL), LL.M.(Leeds).)