U.N.’s Legal Expert Calls Proposed Trade Deals Illegal (TPP, TTIP, TISA, and CETA)

[AntiBank]

http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/06/25/u-n-s-legal-expert-calls-proposed-trade-deals-illegal/



Alfred de Zayas, the U.N.’s Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order, is assigned the task to apply the standards of international law to proposed treaties, to determine whether they’re in accord with international law. On Friday, June 24th, he issued his finding on three large proposed treaties regarding international trade among Atlantic countries: TTIP, TISA, and CETA. Earlier, on February 2nd, he had issued a similar finding on the proposed TPP treaty between Pacific countries, and his conclusion there was the same: that the proposed treaty violates international laws, and is inconsistent with democracy.

His finding regarding the proposed Atlantic treaties condemned them by saying: “Trade deals prepared and negotiated in secret, excluding key stakeholders such as labour unions, consumer associations, health professionals and environmental experts and now parliaments, have zero democratic legitimacy.” This describes all of U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposed treaties on trade: TPP, TTIP, and TISA, and it also includes CETA, which is the proposed treaty between the EU and Canada.
He further damningly noted that, “Disfranchising the public from participating in this important debate is undemocratic and manifests a profound disregard to peoples’ voice.”

The U.N.’s press release, on June 24th, from its Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), especially notes:
An earlier consultation conducted by the European Commission in 2014 resulted in 97% of respondents from across Europe expressing opposition to the inclusion of asymmetrical investment protection in Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the USA. “The same would apply to CETA, but no consultation was ever held,” he noted.

“Asymmetrical investment protection” refers to the power that these proposed treaties grant to international corporations to sue (for alleged loss of their profits) nations that increase regulations to protect the safety of the public from toxic products, and from environmental harms, and that protect workers’ rights and other human rights that can also, in some circumstances, reduce corporate profits. “Asymmetrical” refers to the absence in the proposed treaty of any symmetrical power granted to a government to sue an international corporation that violates its laws to protect the public. De Zayas goes further than merely charging that these treaties are “asymmetrical”: he adds that, “In case of conflict between trade agreements and human rights treaties, it is the latter that prevail. States must not enter into agreements that delay, circumvent, hinder or make impossible the fulfillment of human rights treaty obligations.”


snip

[cali]

1. thank you, AB. "Asymetrical investment protection" is

going to come back and bite us in our collective asses. Hard.

Sooner or later, corporations filing investor complaints, under an ISDS, with the U.S. will win. And the threats have some impact of their own.

[AntiBank]

2. thank you for doing yeomans or I should say yeopersons (I stole that phrase from you,lol) work

on this as well

[cali]

4. I'm a woman, but I'm down with "yeoman".

It's an old word. Yeowoman and yeoperson just don't have the same ring to me.

And I don't give a shit if that's not politically correct.

thanks.

[Scientific]

3. There you have it.

“Asymmetrical investment protection” - coming soon to a corporOfascist realm near you.

[HereSince1628]

5. Very interesting

Particularly enjoy reading language reminiscent of asymmetrical warfare associated with terrorism applied to the class-war being waged by corporations.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. And yet Brunei is preparing new laws to oppress LGBT and others as part of their path to TPP

The Sultan wants both profits from TPP and total control of his citizens so extreme laws including stoning LGBT to death are being instituted specifically for the TPP.
The fact that my country supports this action makes my country seem vapid and untruthful when they claim to care about Stonewall, or for that matter Seneca Falls because the women of Brunei will have no rights either.
The Sultan and his family are exempt from these laws. Of course.

[cali]

8. Yes. And the shenanigans around that, have been appalling.

[Hydra]

7. Keep posting the truth AB

No matter how inconvenient for those who have agendas

[Sunlei]

9. I knew the ciggie corps wouldn't want the plain pack, Cancer pics ciggies in America

hey American tobacco corps, at least there's not a $40 a PACK tax on ciggies like in Australia

[davidthegnome]

10. So, basically...

What we all pretty much suspected to begin with, turns out to be true.

The one thing I still can't quite come to grips with is why Obama supports the TPP. I've got a lot of respect for him as a human being - and admiration for his work as President, but there are some things, like this, that really make me go... WTF? The TPP, Arne Duncan, Tim Geithner, Rahm Emanuel, I really hope that, at some future point, someone gets to sit down with him live and ask... "WTF were you thinking, man?"

Maybe there's pressure from lobbyists, certain members of congress and the Senate and so on - so called "experts" telling him how great this would be for the American economy... but from all I've heard, these trade deals are a nightmare. So... why? No. Seriously. Why?

[sulphurdunn]

11. Trade liberalization

is like education reform to transnational corporations. It's about money and power. The US has entered into 14 of these agreements since 1985 that I know of and about 18 more are pending. Obama is a spokesman for this system of modern corporate sovereignty as surely as his predecessors back to Ronald Reagan.