Civil society organisations are writing to express deep concerns about the lack of transparency around the ongoing trade talks on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). They call on The European Commission to open the negotiation process to the public, by releasing the negotiating mandate, documents submitted by the EU, and negotiating texts.
Seattle to Brussesls analysis: The European Commission’s note on “Investment Provisions in the EU-Canada free trade agreement ’’ is a lobby document, not an objective and complete presentation on the issue At the end of 2013 the European Commission produced a note presenting and explaining the “Investment Provisions in the EU-Canada free trade agreement” (CETA).
The European Commission recently issued two papers to address growing concerns among civil society and the wider general public over inclusion of the increasingly controversial investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS) in the EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Protection agreement (TTIP). The Seattle to Brussels Network responds to the arguments and the Commission’s proposals to amend the flaws in the ISDS system.
China and the EU are preparing to launch negotiations for a bilateral investment agreement at the next EU-China Summit this November. The proposed agreement would replace existing bilateral investment treaties between EU member states and China. This is the moment to develop a more balanced international investment framework that would protect the sovereign power of both parties.
In the 2012 report Profiting from Injustice, jointly published by Corporate Europe Observatory and the Transnational Institute, we boldly asserted that law firms, arbitrators and third-party funders have, over the past two decades, helped maintain an investor-biased arbitration system and have fuelled the rise in investor-state disputes.[1]
An illuminating essay on historical developments in Russia's foreign policy over the last century that argues that only internal political collapse now has the chance to inaugurate a new foreign policy relevant to a post-crisis world.
Signing international investment treaties, in the hope of attracting foreign investments, has been a central strategy for governments looking to improve economic development. The less known side of this story is that by signing investment treaties, governments are giving away the sovereign right to regulate in the interest of people and the environment. They also expose themselves to the risk of spending millions in law suits that could have been used to serve public needs. It’s time that the dark side of investment is put under the spotlight.
Between 20 and 21 September 2011, 40 ASEAN campaigners and experts met in Manila to share knowledge and experiences, articulate common strategies and discuss alternatives to the current investment regime.
The Seattle to Brussels Network beliefs that BITs are posing a threat to public policy, democratic governance and the public interest; and that they need to be radically overhauled.
