There is NO need for the Investor/State Dispute Settlement system in the TPP or TTIP.
The original reason for the ISDS in Free Trade Agreements such as NAFTA and CAFTA and others, was purportedly to ensure that corporations that invested significant resources in less than stable countries (read third world countries) didn't have their investments expropriated by the government or simply disappear. The ISDS process is binding. It is one where three rotating private lawyers, who also defend corporations when they aren't hearing ISDS cases, decide on cases brought by corporations against countries. For instance, a change in regulations that negatively impacts future earnings has often been used as a reason for lodging a case against a country.
The ISDS proposals for both the TPP and the TTIP expand corporate rights. But why is this necessary with countries like the ones that comprise the TTP and TTIP? They have stable governments with judiciaries capable of hearing and deciding these cases.
Let's be clear. This is a power grab enabled by the U.S. government- which has been insistent on beefing up ISDS, already tilted in favor of corporations, to further favor them.
I don't think the ISDS process as enacted in any FTA, serves anyone but corporate entities well, but as written (we've seen the leak of this chapter in the TPP), it's even more onerous.
Yes, I expect this to sink, and if not, there will be the usual folks defending it because they see it as an attack on the President. Alas, they are almost all uninformed.
= new reply since forum marked as read
