KoBold Makes Offer for Congo Lithium as Country Courts US, page-1806

I'm not sure how well reseached you are on this topic but in any case here is an excerp from Gemini:

Navigating Defiance: The Repercussions for Nations Ignoring ICSID RulingsWhen a country chooses to defy a ruling from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an arm of the World Bank Group dedicated to resolving international investment disputes, it steps into a complex arena of legal, financial, and reputational consequences. While ICSID itself lacks a direct enforcement body like a global police force, its dispute resolution mechanism is backed by international treaties and carries significant weight in the international legal and economic order.At the core of the ICSID framework lies the ICSID Convention, which has been ratified by over 150 countries. A key provision, Article 53, stipulates that arbitral awards rendered under the Convention are binding on the parties involved and are not subject to appeal or any other remedy except those provided for within the Convention itself (such as interpretation, revision, or annulment under specific, limited grounds).Furthermore, Article 54 of the Convention obligates each contracting state to recognize an ICSID award as binding and to enforce the pecuniary obligations imposed by that award within its territories as if it were a final judgment of its own courts. This is a cornerstone of the ICSID system, designed to ensure the effectiveness of its awards.However, if a state refuses to comply with an ICSID ruling, several scenarios and consequences can unfold:Legal and Enforcement Challengesomestic Court

Enforcement: The award creditor (the investor who won the case) can seek to have the award recognized and enforced in the domestic courts of any ICSID member state where the defiant country holds assets. While Article 54 mandates recognition, the actual execution of the award (seizing assets) can sometimes encounter hurdles related to the host state's laws on sovereign immunity (Article 55 of the ICSID Convention). This means that while a court may recognize the debt, assets used for sovereign or diplomatic purposes might be protected from seizure, leading to protracted legal battles to identify and attach commercial assets.International Legal Pressure: Non-compliance constitutes a breach of an international obligation under the ICSID Convention. This can lead to further legal claims or diplomatic pressure from the investor's home state.Challenges to Sovereign Immunity: While sovereign immunity can be a defense against execution, the act of ratifying the ICSID Convention is often interpreted by courts in other jurisdictions as a waiver of immunity from jurisdiction regarding the recognition and enforcement of an award. However, immunity from execution of assets remains a more complex area.

Financial and Economic Repercussions:Damage to Investor Confidence and Creditworthiness: A state's refusal to honor an ICSID award can significantly tarnish its reputation among international investors. This can lead to a decline in foreign direct investment (FDI), as businesses become wary of the country's commitment to upholding legal obligations and protecting investments.Increased Borrowing Costs: International credit rating agencies closely monitor a country's adherence to international legal and financial commitments. Non-compliance with an ICSID award can negatively impact a country's credit rating, making it more expensive to borrow on international markets.Difficulty Accessing International Finance: Multilateral development banks and other international financial institutions may be hesitant to provide loans or assistance to a country that disregards international arbitral awards.

Reputational and Diplomatic Fallout:Harm to International Standing: Defying a widely recognized international dispute settlement mechanism like ICSID can damage a country's standing within the international community and portray it as an unreliable partner.Strained Diplomatic Relations: Non-compliance can strain diplomatic relations with the home country of the investor who is owed compensation. This can spill over into other areas of bilateral cooperation.

Historical Context: While most ICSID awards are eventually complied with, there have been instances of states initially resisting or delaying compliance, often citing domestic legal reasons or sovereign immunity. Countries like Argentina, following its economic crisis in the early 2000s, faced numerous ICSID claims and had a mixed record of compliance, leading to prolonged legal battles by award creditors to enforce judgments against Argentine assets abroad. Venezuela also withdrew from the ICSID Convention in 2012, though this did not absolve it from obligations under awards rendered prior to its withdrawal or under ongoing bilateral investment treaties.In conclusion, while a country might tactically choose to go against an ICSID ruling, this path is fraught with significant legal hurdles, potential financial detriments, and lasting reputational damage. The interconnectedness of the global economy and legal systems means that outright defiance often leads to a cascade of negative consequences that can outweigh any perceived short-term benefits of non-compliance. Sources Generate Audio Overview