Abstract:

International capital movements have become very important in the world economy especially since 1990’s. On side international capital stoks has reached to so huge amounts, and on the other side foreign capital movements’s influences have increased at both micro and macro economic area in regarded to countries. As parallel at this trend, the multinational corporates as an economic actor have appeared and become more powerful. It is very natural that the multinational corporations which have become stronger want to be powerful at political-juridictional ground. Hence, it is necessary to the multinational corporations struggle for adopting influence against national states that have been dominant actors in the prior era. The purpose in this struggle is to expand the freedom’s field of multinational corporates. This object implies that the international capital flows have to been liberalized. MAI’s frame has been constituted in the purpose of that the international capital movements become liberal exactly and all of barriers in front of them are abolished. It is very natural that the international capital wants to be protected (garanteed) against no-economic risk and unreasonable competience from the host country. Adittionally, on hand it is obvius that every country which developped or undevelopped need foreign capital. But in the other hand, the regulatory frame how the foreign capital inflow to the country is very significant in respect to whether or not foreign capital is useful for the host country.MAI has targetted protecting only foreign investor. However, the host country also requires to be protected against foreign capital. On the other side, a regulation such as this has to offer some rights and the possibility to take precautions. In brief it has to build an equilibrium between foreign investor and host country.The basises of MAI can be listed so that: (ı) national treatment, (ıı) the most favoured nation/country treatment, (ııı) all payments relating to an investment may be freely transferred into and out of the host country (freedom of transferring), (ıv) any condition (for instance, export, import, imployement, tecnology transfer into country, production, research and development,… etc.) must not be put on foreign investor, (v) it is free to temporary entry, stay, reside, exit for key person, managers, its workers, and their families about foreign investment, (vı) it can be referred to the international arbitration to resolve any dispute, (vıı) any applying against foreign investor shall be abolished, and the loss or damage which a foreign investor incurred shall be compensed by the government, (vııı) it mustn’t be imposed an obligation as that the foreign investor has to appoint or employ a person from the host country or any particular natinality/country, (ıx) the state’s monopolies existed shall be abrogated, (x) foreign investor can freely entry to and act in every area that is open for the private sector of the host counry, (xı) it has to be treated between foreign and host country’s investor on a non-discriminatory basis on taxing, subvantion, privatization, expropriation, nationalizatin, (xıı) it is recognised to impose certain exceptions and temporary safeguards which are current in general or specular situations to the host country.The responses those main questions are seeked in the study: (ı) does it need or not that the international capital movements are regulated? (ıı) how does this regulation have to be, and what characters does it have to have? What basises does it accept as origins? (ııı) What degree is MAI according to the ideal frame concerning international capital movements? (ıv) What may the international capital inflow whose frame is MAI make gain and lose for host country? (v) What are the similarities or difference between MAI and the practice in Turkey?

Keywords: