Rosia Montana, an omen for TTIP

[magical thyme]

34. you clearly didn't read the excerpts from citizen.org that I posted.

No, arbiters cannot be "almost anyone."

Yes, environmental laws have been rolled back. They were in one of the cases I cited, which you would have noticed if you'd taken the time to read it.

And no, every one of those countries is not ready to sign another agreement.

France and Germany to form united front against ISDS
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/trade-society/france-and-germany-form-united-front-against-isds-311267
France and Germany are both outspoken in their criticisms of the inclusion of the Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism in the ongoing trade talks with the US. The two countries are discussing throwing their combined weight behind a common position onthe matter. EurActiv France reports.
Paris and Berlin want the Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS) removed from in the transatlantic trade treaty currently being negotiated with Washington.

Australia’s rejection of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Four potential contributing factors
http://www.iisd.org/itn/2011/07/12/australias-rejection-of-investor-state-dispute-settlement-four-potential-contributing-factors/
In April of this year, as a part of a broader rethink of Australia’s approach to international trade negotiations, the Gillard Government vowed that it will no longer include provisions on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in bilateral and regional trade agreements.[1] The new policy is justified by reference to the principles of ‘no greater rights’ for foreign investors and the government’s ‘right to regulate’ to protect the public interest. These principles have long been advocated by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) but have generally only been paid lip service by governments.

Multiple Countries Rejecting Investor State Dispute Settlement
http://justinvestment.org/2012/04/multiple-countries-rejecting-investor-state-dispute-settlement/
Following on the heels of Australia, Korea appeared poised to go the same route with polls showing the opposition, which rejected ISD, favoured to win the upcoming election; however, in the election held yesterday, the governing Conservatives managed to hold on to a slender majority so the jury is still out as regards South Korea. [2] [3] However one clue might be found in a recent April 6th claim by India that it plans to abolish the investor-state dispute system and renegotiate FTAs with South Korea, Singapore, and other countries. According to the English language newspaper, Indian Express, New Delhi´s decision to abandon the ISD system is based on its first-hand experience with the potential threat foreign companies pose to public policy on the grounds of investment agreement violations. [4]

Other countries that have concerns with, are opposed to, or have rejected, ISD, include the South African government which is re- examining the ISD system after a policy of affirmative action for blacks, aimed at reducing economic disparities between white and black people, was targeted in 2007 by a multinational corporation; the Brazilian parliament which has refused to ratify a number of investment agreements on the grounds that they infringe on legislative sovereignty and Ecuador and Bolivia that have pulled out of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes convention. [4]