A clear and plain language guide to the EU's neoliberal investment regime, explaining both the social and environmental costs of prying open poor, vulnerable countries' economies, as well as outlining a number of ethical alternatives.
As the European Parliament drafts its opinion on the controversial TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) talks, 375 civil society organisations from across Europe have called on EU decision-makers to protect citizens, workers, and the environment from the threats it poses.
Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) erode the ability of governments to act in the best interests of their citizens by allowing foreign investors to sue sovereign states when governments' social, environmental and economic regulations have affected their profits. TNI, as part of the Seattle to Brussels network, is campaigning for a Just EU Investment policy that puts corporate accountability and human rights above corporate profits!
Mondiaal Nieuws -Nederlandse bilaterale verdragen spelen een sleutelrol in de zaken die multinationals aanspannen tegen ontwikkelingslanden, wanneer ze menen last te hebben van nieuwe regelgeving. Meer dan 10 procent van alle bekende claims zijn gebaseerd op een Nederlands verdrag, en daarvan is driekwart ingediend door firma's die alleen met hun brievenbus in Nederland gevestigd zijn.
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.
The proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US will open the floodgate to multi-million Euro lawsuits from corporations challenging democratic policies to protect the environment and public health, argues a new briefing by Corporate Europe Observatory and the Transnational Institute.
The world's investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) system faces the largest crisis in its history. Why is the European Commission rejecting the justified criticism that can be found all over the world?
Pietje Vervest, Timothé Feodoroff, Giorgina Garibotto et al.
06 March 2014
A briefing that explores how a trade agreement currently being negotiated between the US and the EU could open the way to multi-billion euro lawsuits from companies wanting to expand “fracking” for shale gas and oil.
Corporations in Western Europe are suing Central and Eastern European countries at international arbitration tribunals through a vast web of intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). Yet while the European Commission has questioned the validity of these BITs, Netherlands, Germany, and the UK, oppose their termination.
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.
A debate about the impacts of the Investor to States Disputes Settlement on the environment, between representatives from the European Commission and Civil Society Organizations from Europe, US and Canada was held in Brussels during the last negotiations round of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership