EU:s framtida avtal kan kräva godkännande
Frihandelsavtal som innehåller tvistlösningssystem kan inte införas av EU utan att samtliga medlemsländer ger sitt godkännande. Det är kontentan av en dom från EU-domstolen, enligt TT. Det specifika fallet rör EU och Singapores handelsavtal.
"En sådan ordning, som undandrar tvister från medlemsstaternas jurisdiktion, kan inte införas utan deras samtycke. Frihandelsavtalet, i sin nuvarande lydelse, kan följaktligen bara ingås av unionen och medlemsstaterna gemensamt", skriver domstolen.
Tvistlösningsmekanismerna i frihandelsavtal har varit kontroversiella, som i fallet med det så kallade investerarskyddet (ISDS) i Ceta-avtalet mellan EU och Kanada eller TTIP mellan USA och EU.
bakgrund
Investor-state dispute settlement
Wikipedia (en)
Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) or investment court system (ICS) is a system through which individual companies can sue countries for alleged discriminatory practices. The practice was made widely known through the Philip Morris v. Uruguay case, where the tobacco company Philip Morris sued Uruguay after having enacted strict laws aimed at promoting public health. ISDS is an instrument of public international law and provisions are contained in a number of bilateral investment treaties, in certain international trade treaties, such as NAFTA (chapter 11), and the proposed TPP (chapters 9 and 28) and CETA (sections 3 and 4) agreements. ISDS is also found in international investment agreements, such as the Energy Charter Treaty. If an investor from one country (the "home state") invests in another country (the "host state"), both of which have agreed to ISDS, and the host state violates the rights granted to the investor under public international law, then that investor may bring the matter before an arbitral tribunal.
While ISDS is often associated with international arbitration under the rules of ICSID (the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes of the World Bank), it often takes place under the auspices of international arbitral tribunals governed by different rules or institutions, such as the London Court of International Arbitration, the International Chamber of Commerce, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre or the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. ISDS has been criticized because the United States has never lost any of its ISDS cases, and that the system is biased to favor American companies and American trade over other Western countries, and Western countries over the rest of the world.
Omni är politiskt obundna och oberoende. Vi strävar efter att ge fler perspektiv på nyheterna. Har du frågor eller synpunkter kring vår rapportering? Kontakta redaktionen