On 16 May, Ecuador became the fifth country to terminate all its Bilateral investment treaties (BIT). Why did it make this decision? TNI researcher Cecilia Olivet, and president of the Ecuadorian Citizens Commission that audited the country’s investment protection treaties, shares her insider perspective.
ERPI is starting a Working Paper series, supported by a limited number of small grants, to allow for the writing up of original research. In parallel they are inviting short contributions in a variety of media that help to map out responses and alternatives. The Initiative will hold a major international conference, bringing this work together, with the aim of thinking together about new directions, both for academic research and practical action.
Impression of the Dutch delegation at the Nyéléni Europe Forum 2016 in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Over 500 people from all over Europe gathered there at the end of October for five days to lay the groundwork to take back, relocalise our food systems and multiply food sovereignty platforms across the continent.
The Ecuadorian government announced yesterday that it will complete the process to terminate its remaining 16 Bilateral Investment Treaties. This decision is based on the recommendation of the audit commission’s 668 page report (In Spanish).
The legal approach to coca has been one of the most challenging topics in the current international drug control system, due to the plant’s connection to both commercial cocaine and ancient Andean traditions. Yet it’s rare for a case related to the coca leaf to come before a European court, in a region where those traditions are rarely discussed.
(Quito/Amsterdam, 3 May 2017) A unique international audit commission that examined the benefits and costs of Ecuador’s investment protection treaties will publish its findings on Monday 8 May. The report is to be released 5 days after Ecuador’s National Assembly recommended the government to terminate 12 remaining Bilateral Investment Treaties.
The South African government’s plan to bulldoze through a nuclear energy deal has been dealt what might be a fatal blow by the Cape Town High court which has declared the plan invalid. It found that the government had not followed due process in making the decision to pursue a nuclear power option, as well as in other critical areas.
With the Trump administration denying climate change and de-fanging the EPA, what is the US military thinking - and planning to do? Can their power and influence help the climate movement succeed? Who will be protected, who will be neglected, who will suffer, and who will pay, if the military get their way? What about the intelligence agencies? What are the consequences of viewing climate change through the lens of national security? Is there a better way?
The Economist - In much of the Middle East and north Africa, where the law often lumps pot in with harder drugs, possession of a single joint can lead to jail. But some governments are acknowledging the harmful effects of their policies and thinking about reform.
The US military may be the last defender of climate science within the Trump administration, but don't expect the Pentagon to fight for climate justice. Preparing for climate crises is a funding boon for the military, which exists to uphold a fossil fuel-hungry empire that is driving climate disruption in the first place.
There are serious concerns that government reforms will further exacerbate land tenure and food insecurity for the majority of the population in Myanmar who rely on their farm fields and forests for their livelihoods.
Barcelona, March 22, World Water Day – Confronted with the failings of water privatisation, cities and citizens of Terrassa and Barcelona, in Catalonia, have moved to return water services to public and democratic control, improving their quality and accessibility.