Bifurcation be damned!

From Sermitsiaq just now (18 May) is a piece by Trine J Jorgensen titled: "An uncertain investment country", below.
The day before, a Danish Bar and Law Society report said: "Judges in Greenland should be better educated."
Note: Others in Greenland should be better educated as well.

These mean, surely, and fortunately, that the arbitration will continue in Denmark.

The legal dispute over Kuannersuit/Kvanefjeld scares investors away because it highlights legal and political challenges in Greenland. Researchers from the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) are urging the Government of Greenland to take a closer look at its justice system.Foreign investment in energy and energy Raw materials projects are essential for many countries that want to use their natural resources for economic development. Because it takes a lot of money to financing a hydroelectric power plant or a process plant.But from an investor point of view, the big projects are vulnerable to state intervention, and many countries therefore go to great lengths to ensure that foreign investors receive a fair trial in the event of disputes. The current arbitration case on Kuannersuit shows some of the legal and political challenges in Greenland on the way to more economic and constitutional independence. This is what the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) in a new political memo, where they also include a number of recommendations to both Inatsisartut and Naalakkersuisut.. The Australian company Energy Transition believes Minerals (formerly Greenland Minerals) that, based on their exploration licence from 2007 is entitled to receive an exploitation licence, provided that their project fulfils all the required conditions. They have therefore arbitration proceedings against Denmark and Greenland with reference to the fact that the raw materials were a common concern in 2007 and that the standard conditions for the Mining licenses allow for international arbitration.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ICELAND AND THE GOVERNMENT OF GREENLAND- Strengthen Greenland's judicial system by preparing arbitrators to conduct international arbitration proceedings as a necessary step in the preparation of future foreign investment-Assess whether to either put the Danish Arbitration Act of 2005 in force or formulate a separate Greenlandic Arbitration Act, perhaps in addition to the preparation of a model for bilateral investment agreements- Consider when the draft constitution for a future independent state is audited, whether the benefits (in the form of investor confidence, institutional autonomy and resources) by keeping a final court of appeal outside Greenland outweighs the disadvantages of not having an independent court in Nuuk. On the other side are the Government of Greenland and authorities, who with a new law from 2021, have rejected the project because The limit values for uranium are exceeded. In addition, the Attorney General argues, representing Denmark and Greenland with the fact that an arbitration case is in conflict with the legal rules in Denmark and Greenland and in violation of the dispute settlement clause The terms of the exploration permit that the company was been notified. Establishment of Greenlandic arbitration court According to DIIS, this is a rather complex legal issue landscape for foreign investors. Greenland has largely independent authority, but in some areas Danish law is still applicable. It creates uncertainty, and therefore DIIS recommends that the Government of Greenland and Inatsisartut is exploring the possibility of establishing its own international arbitration tribunal. And In addition, in the long term - the draft Constitution for a future independent state needs to be reviewed – to consider whether the benefits of holding a court of appeal outside Greenland outweighs the disadvantages of having a independent court in Nuuk. According to the DIIS researchers, it could create uncertainty among investors if Greenland has its own legal system, and therefore they recommend that the Supreme Court continue to be in Denmark, as you also see in several Caribbean states, which even after full Independence chose to keep the British Legal Affairs Committee Privy Council in London as the last court of appeal.