A number of Bilateral Investment Treaties have been signed with South Asian countries (BITs). MFN clauses were added in these treaties, and they were construed extremely broadly, allowing investors to borrow favorable dispute settlement measures from third-country BITs. When disagreements emerge, this dynamic policy tool allows investors to cherry select more favorable treatment from third-party BITs under the cover of wide interpretation. In the sphere of international trade law, where the traditional use of MFN attempted to provide substantive protection, this provision is applied in the domain of investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms for both substantive and procedural treatment. Furthermore, the MFN clause is utilized to get around a number of prerequisites for establishing official international arbitration. For this, MFN provision is widely used to get a quick remedy with ambiguous interpretations. The author, in this article, will try to indicate the area of the problem of using the MFN provisions in the context of shortening the waiting period, widening the jurisdictions etc.