By Richard Cooper and Boaz Morag (December 15, 2017, 11:55 AM EST) -- As more and more Venezuelan debt becomes past due, holders of the republic's $36 billion of sovereign bonds[1] are faced with an interesting choice should they wish to exercise remedies.[2] The traditional response of an aggrieved bondholder would be to seek to obtain a judgment for missed payments (either before or after an acceleration of the bonds) under the law and in the courts made available to it under the applicable bond documentation. In the case of the republic's bonds, this would mean bringing a suit for nonpayment under New York law either in New York or London, where the republic has consented to jurisdiction, appointed an agent for service of process, and also waived any claim of an inconvenient forum, a right to trial by jury, and sovereign immunity.[3] Despite the fact that the republic's bond documentation includes these bondholder-friendly protections, some commentators have nonetheless proposed investment treaty arbitration as a preferred and plausible alternative to New York or London court litigation for those seeking to recover on their defaulted bonds. These commentators ground their recommendation on the perceived advantages an arbitral award subject to the ICSID[4] Convention offers over a New York or English court judgment, believing that such an award would permit them to seek enforcement worldwide on an accelerated time frame. This ICSID approach obtains its inspiration from an arbitration filed by tens of thousands of retail Argentine bondholders in which they established ICSID jurisdiction over claims for defaulted bonds and eventually received partial payment in settlement with Argentina last year.[5]...