From Japan: TPP sets limit on corporate suits

[pampango]

The Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade pact limits the period for foreign companies to file damages lawsuits against host states over sudden regulatory changes to 3½ years, Jiji Press learned Wednesday.

The limit, included in a TPP provision on investor-state dispute settlement, is designed to prevent abuse of litigation by multinational businesses. ISDS gives the legal basis for foreign businesses to challenge sudden changes in host country regulations.

Japan and the United States had pushed for the introduction of ISDS in an effort to help their companies go overseas. They successfully persuaded Australia and other reluctant countries by proposing the limit.

The ISDS provision allows member governments to introduce regulations about medical care and the environment at their own discretion. The provision also states that member governments will not be forced to change regulations even if they lose lawsuits from foreign businesses.

http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0002510148

I wonder if Japan has published the full text of the TPP or how does anyone know what the ISDS rules are in the agreement? If - a big IF - "member governments will not be forced to change regulations even if they lose lawsuits from foreign businesses" - that would be a big deal.

[uawchild]

1. poor corporations...

"The Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade pact limits the period for foreign companies to file damages lawsuits against host states over sudden regulatory changes to 3½ years"

What!?! Only three and a half YEARS to file a lawsuit? How are the poor overworked massive legal staffs of global corporations supposed to cope with that? /sarcasm

Was this 3.5 year limit supposed to make us feel protected or something?

[Hoyt]

3. You've been "unprotected" in 2500 similar agreements worldwide since 1959. It took TPP, and

Sanders and Warren, to tell us how bad these agreements are and that all the countries clamoring to sign them are corrupt -- even Sanders' favorite, Denmark.

[pampango]

4. True. IF corporations can't force governments to change regulations even if they win a lawsuit, that

might bother them. There were past reports that corporations would have the right to force governments to change regulations so it would be some degree of progress IF that is not true.

Though apparently Australia forced other countries to accept the reduced 3 1/2 year time limit for law suits that won't bother corporations nearly as much.

I wonder how much of this is true since it it not clear that the Japanese have seen any more of the final text than any of us have seen.

[Hoyt]

2. Even NAFTA and 2500 similar agreements with ISDS did not force countries to change regulations.

In the unlikely event a company "won" a suit, they might be awarded damages. And as bad as folks seem to think the tribunals are, countries continue to actively seek to be part of these agreements -- even Scandinavian countries.

The fact is, if those opposed to TPP take the time to read it in its final form when released, they are likely to find all kinds of improvements -- or clarifications that head off the complaints that the "TPP COULD result in this or that awful outcome."

[uawchild]

5. will there be time to stop it though, if need be?

"The fact is, if those opposed to TPP take the time to read it in its final form WHEN RELEASED(my emphasis added here - uawchild), they are LIKELY TO FIND ALL KINDS OF IMPROVEMENTS (my emphasis added here - uawchild) -- or clarifications that head off the complaints that the "TPP COULD result in this or that awful outcome.""

But the plan seems to be to withhold the final form as long as possible, limit debate and ramrod the TPP thru as fast as possible though, no?

Pardon me for not sharing your faith that "they are likely to find all kinds of improvements" in the final form of the TPP -- when it's finally released into the light of day.

[Hoyt]

6. Unless you are a slow reader, you'll have plenty of time and can probably find GOPers to join you

in opposing Obama on this.

[uawchild]

7. time to read it, sure...

time to organize effective political opposition to it, if need be? I am not so sure. And I hope you don't think that people that have concerns about the TPP and the process to get it approved, are all GOP-ers out to stick it to President Obama. That's an unfair characterization and insinuations alluding to it are disingenuous, at best, and border on ad hominem attacks.

[Hoyt]

8. GOPers are coming out against it in an attempt to tarnish Obama. People have been complaining

about the TPP for years. This is one of Sanders' key issues.

I have been accused of joining the GOPers for not automatically denouncing the agreement. I didn't feel it was an ad hominem attack. Now that GOPers are joining the Democrats opposed to it, you shouldn't either.