NAFTA Tribunals Stir U.S. Worries

[Dover]

Nafta Tribunals Stir U.S. Worries

By ADAM LIPTAK

Published: April 18, 2004


After the highest court in Massachusetts ruled against a Canadian real estate company and after the United State Supreme Court declined to hear its appeal, the company's day in court was over.

Or so thought Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall of the Massachusetts court, until she learned of yet another layer of judicial review, by an international tribunal.

"I was at a dinner party," Chief Justice Marshall said in a recent telephone interview. "To say I was surprised to hear that a judgment of this court was being subjected to further review would be an understatement."

Tribunals like the one that ruled on the Massachusetts case were created by the North American Free Trade Agreement, and they have heard two challenges to American court judgments. In the other, the tribunal declared a Mississippi court's judgment at odds with international law, leaving the United States government potentially liable for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Any Canadian or Mexican business that contends it has been treated unjustly by the American judicial system can file a similar claim. American businesses with similar complaints about Canadian or Mexican court judgments can do the same. Under the Nafta agreement the government whose court system is challenged is responsible for awards by the tribunals.

"This is the biggest threat to United States judicial independence that no one has heard of and even fewer people understand," said John D. Echeverria, a law professor at Georgetown University...

cont'd

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/politics/18COUR.html?8br

[bluestateguy]

1. Pat Buchanan was right

This NAFTA, these GATT deals, they're selling out American workers and surrenduring the national sovereignty of the United States.

[Dover]

2. Is the sale of our sovereignty the price being paid for a New World Order?

No borders, no boundaries, no regulation......PNAC

[BadGimp]

6. simple answer is YES

Trilateral Comission

Council on Foreign Relations

not PNAC

are the culprits from what I have read

but then what do I know..

[schultzee]

7. Yes and Ross Perot was right too. I did not vote for Clinton because

I realized what he was doing with NAFTA. I voted for Perot. Clinton sold out the core democrates with NAFTA and I hate him for that. He lobbied for it, calling congressmen at all hours of the night. DLC nasty.

[Occulus]

11. It's amazing,

but on economic issues, I definitely agree with him. Our government is selling us out in the name of 'free trade.'

[rumguy]

3. this is an issue that if used properly could unite people

accross party lines...

it's the surrender of our democracy to international tribunals tilted towards the mega-corporations...

[nonbelief]

4. Oh, dear...

Watch the poor Americans whine when the shoe's on the other foot for a change.

[hedgetrimmer]

5. Because this needs to be at the top ... Wake Up Call!... BUMP! n/t

[Elwood P Dowd]

8. Welcome to Chapter 11 of NAFTA

Bill Clinton has done more harm to this party than most of you will
ever realize. He sold out and jumped in bed with Newt, Dole, Mikel,
Armey, and the other repuke sleaze. As soon as they got all the trade
deals and telecommunications garbage they wanted passed, they framed him and screwed us. Made us look like a bunch of fools - especially all the idiots that kept supporting this free trade shit until the bitter end.

NAFTA isn't free trade. It's an enrichment scheme for rich investors and CEOs.

[w4rma]

9. It will always be my belief that NAFTA is mainly why Dems lost big in 1994

On a positive note, Sen. Kerry appears to have tried to stop this aspect of NAFTA, or at least limit it.

…
The part of Nafta that created the tribunals, known as Chapter 11, received no consideration when it was passed in 1993.

"When we debated Nafta," Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in 2002, "not a single word was uttered in discussing Chapter 11. Why? Because we didn't know how this provision would play out. No one really knew just how high the stakes would get."

Senator Kerry spoke before the tribunal rulings concerning the Massachusetts and Mississippi judgments. He offered his comments in connection with legislation he had offered to limit the jurisdiction of the tribunals. His amendment was rejected by the Senate.
…

[Elwood P Dowd]

10. Kick

I still get mad when I think of 1993 and the NAFTA debate. If Kerry
picks Bill Richardson for VP, I will puke. He told as many lies as
Newt and Dole during that debate. Bill Richardson is a piece of
#*$*&^.

[NashVegas]

12. Don't forget WTO Court, Too

It's funny how the same people who stoke the paranoia of the RW militants against the UN overriding US law had no problem selling out for GATT & NAFTA.

[NuttyFluffers]

13. "Wheee!! Here comes another dip!!"

what a roller coaster this has all been! anyone want to get off the ride yet?

[chenGOD]

14. Hah.

I've been arguing with conservatives for years that WTO, NAFTA and GATT are terrible treaties and organizations (I'm a Canadian btw), and that these boards are not elected by anyone and will serve no one but corporations. Now that it's coming back to bite American companies in the ass, maybe they'll start changing their tune.