In an increasingly globalized world, the law has had to incorporate new figures and institutions in order to respond to the new demands in the legal trade. Thus, international investment arbitration has become renowned as the most suitable method for conflict resolution in matters pertaining to international investments. Despite the criticism and praise that it has received, its addition has certainly caused more of a challenge at a doctrinal level. This investigation intends to answer the dogmatic issue of the addition of international investments arbitration in the national legal system, under the Chilean jurisdictional framework. Although the constitutional mandate states that the courts determined by law are the ones called to carry out the jurisdictional function, the rise of investment arbitration is left in the hands of international treaties that Chile has signed and ratified.