South Africa is moving away from international investment treaties towards a new framework for investment protection based on domestic law. Contrary to some opinions, there are cogent arguments in favour of this approach.
During the CELAC-EU President Summit in Chile, some Latin American governments rejected the inclusion in the final declaration of the proposed EU wording in support of providing foreign investors legal certainty. To understand why, we need to look at the industry behind investment arbitration.
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 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.
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.
Op 10 september wees de Europese Commissie een verzoek van ruim 200 maatschappelijke organisaties af om een opiniepeiling te houden onder alle EU-burgers over de vrijhandelsverdragen TTIP en CETA. De Nederlandse minister Ploumen (Buitenlandse Handel/ Ontwikkelingssamenwerking) poogde het parlement te bespelen met niet hard te maken toezeggingen. Hoe werd hierop gereageerd door TTIP-critici? En kan ondertekening gevolgen hebben voor de Europese Grondwet?
Saturday October 11 saw an extraordinary mobilization success. Over 400 actions were organized in 20 European countries to reject the secret trade deals that the EU is negotiating (TTIP, CETA and TiSA)
248 pages of leaked documents confirm concerns: In a misguided effort to conclude one of the most ambitious trade deals ever, negotiators are arguing away hard-won health, workplace, food, farming and environmental safeguards, while pushing power further from electorates, citizens and regulators, and deeper into the hands of businesses, corporations and interest groups.
Investment protection and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms are perhaps the most contentious aspects of TTIP and CETA. These mechanisms provide foreign investors with the right to sue the EU or its Member States in private tribunals over potential losses in profit due to current or new public welfare regulations.
Leaked TTIP documents show the EU is promoting unrestricted trade in fossil fuels and working to limit the implementation of clean energy policies, just months after the bloc proudly claimed to have “been at the forefront of international efforts towards a global climate deal”