Investor-State Dispute Settlement in the TTIP and CETA

Posted on July 22, 2014 in Policy Context

—

PolicyAlternatives.ca – Publications/Reports – Submission to the European Commission’s Public Consultation
July 31, 2014.   Scott Sinclair

One of the most controversial elements of modern trade treaties is the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows foreign investors to bypass domestic courts and directly challenge government measures before unaccountable arbitration tribunals.

ISDS is slated to be a key feature of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) currently being negotiated between the U.S. and the European Union (EU). The planned provisions are modelled on the ISDS mechanism in the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).

Faced with unprecedented levels of public criticism, however, the European Commission has paused the TTIP negotiations on ISDS in order to consult the public. In his submission to the consultation, Scott Sinclair, CCPA’s senior trade policy researcher, argues that there is no credible justification for including ISDS in either the CETA or the TTIP.

– See more at: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/investor-state-dispute-settlement-ttip-and-ceta#sthash.XsZmDEFh.dpuf

< https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/investor-state-dispute-settlement-ttip-and-ceta >

Tags: , , , , ,

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 11:27 am and is filed under Policy Context. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply