SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
European Commission Accused of 'Putting Lipstick on a Pig' With Rebranded Corporate-Friendly Trade Mechanism
'This new proposal doesn’t change the fundamental problem of giving corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies.'—Nick Dearden, Global Justice Now
Sep 16, 2015
A social justice organization has accused the European Commission of "putting lipstick on a pig" with its plan for a new court system for a pending EU-US trade deal the group says still affords "corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
The proposed system, the Investment Court System, would replace the controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows corporations to bypass domestic courts to sue governments over policies that could affect their profits.
Talks on the trade deal, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), "have been dogged by disagreements, particularly over Washington's insistence that as part of the pact, private companies be allowed to sue governments before special tribunals," Agence France-Presse reports. Reuters adds:
Fears that U.S. multinationals could use private arbitration rules in the proposed trade pact to challenge European food and environmental laws have overshadowed a transatlantic project meant to ease business and compete with China's economic might.
Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom made the announcement Wednesday, saying in a statement: "Today, we're delivering on our promise--to propose a new, modernised system of investment courts, subject to democratic principles and public scrutiny."
"We want to establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts," her statement continues. "I'm making this proposal public at the same time that I send it to the European Parliament and the Member States. It's very important to have an open and transparent exchange of views on this widely debated issue."
UK-based Global Justice Now, however, says the proposal offers mere cosmetic changes to the ISDS mechanism, to which the European public has voiced overwhelming opposition.
Nick Dearden, director of the organization, called the proposal "essentially a PR exercise to get around the enormous controversy and opposition that has been generated by ISDS. The Commission can try to put lipstick on a pig, but this new proposal doesn't change the fundamental problem of giving corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
"The real issue at hand here is that of corporate power," Dearden added. "Commissioner Malmstrom says she wants to 'establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts'--but she hasn't explained why those courts are not good enough for multinational corporations to use."
Friends of the Earth Europe joined Global Justice Now in rejecting the proposal, echoing the concern that the plan ignores the vast public opposition
"The European Commission's proposal for an 'International Court System' is tarred with the same old corporate friendly brush," stated Natacha Cingotti, trade campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe. "Despite a new name and some reforms on the functioning of the system, it reaffirms the granting of VIP rights for corporate investors without giving them any obligations that would protect citizens and the environment."
"As long as companies can sue governments if they act in the public interest, the ability of governments to regulate is undermined," Cingotti stated. "It should be resisted at all costs."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A social justice organization has accused the European Commission of "putting lipstick on a pig" with its plan for a new court system for a pending EU-US trade deal the group says still affords "corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
The proposed system, the Investment Court System, would replace the controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows corporations to bypass domestic courts to sue governments over policies that could affect their profits.
Talks on the trade deal, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), "have been dogged by disagreements, particularly over Washington's insistence that as part of the pact, private companies be allowed to sue governments before special tribunals," Agence France-Presse reports. Reuters adds:
Fears that U.S. multinationals could use private arbitration rules in the proposed trade pact to challenge European food and environmental laws have overshadowed a transatlantic project meant to ease business and compete with China's economic might.
Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom made the announcement Wednesday, saying in a statement: "Today, we're delivering on our promise--to propose a new, modernised system of investment courts, subject to democratic principles and public scrutiny."
"We want to establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts," her statement continues. "I'm making this proposal public at the same time that I send it to the European Parliament and the Member States. It's very important to have an open and transparent exchange of views on this widely debated issue."
UK-based Global Justice Now, however, says the proposal offers mere cosmetic changes to the ISDS mechanism, to which the European public has voiced overwhelming opposition.
Nick Dearden, director of the organization, called the proposal "essentially a PR exercise to get around the enormous controversy and opposition that has been generated by ISDS. The Commission can try to put lipstick on a pig, but this new proposal doesn't change the fundamental problem of giving corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
"The real issue at hand here is that of corporate power," Dearden added. "Commissioner Malmstrom says she wants to 'establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts'--but she hasn't explained why those courts are not good enough for multinational corporations to use."
Friends of the Earth Europe joined Global Justice Now in rejecting the proposal, echoing the concern that the plan ignores the vast public opposition
"The European Commission's proposal for an 'International Court System' is tarred with the same old corporate friendly brush," stated Natacha Cingotti, trade campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe. "Despite a new name and some reforms on the functioning of the system, it reaffirms the granting of VIP rights for corporate investors without giving them any obligations that would protect citizens and the environment."
"As long as companies can sue governments if they act in the public interest, the ability of governments to regulate is undermined," Cingotti stated. "It should be resisted at all costs."
A social justice organization has accused the European Commission of "putting lipstick on a pig" with its plan for a new court system for a pending EU-US trade deal the group says still affords "corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
The proposed system, the Investment Court System, would replace the controversial investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows corporations to bypass domestic courts to sue governments over policies that could affect their profits.
Talks on the trade deal, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), "have been dogged by disagreements, particularly over Washington's insistence that as part of the pact, private companies be allowed to sue governments before special tribunals," Agence France-Presse reports. Reuters adds:
Fears that U.S. multinationals could use private arbitration rules in the proposed trade pact to challenge European food and environmental laws have overshadowed a transatlantic project meant to ease business and compete with China's economic might.
Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom made the announcement Wednesday, saying in a statement: "Today, we're delivering on our promise--to propose a new, modernised system of investment courts, subject to democratic principles and public scrutiny."
"We want to establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts," her statement continues. "I'm making this proposal public at the same time that I send it to the European Parliament and the Member States. It's very important to have an open and transparent exchange of views on this widely debated issue."
UK-based Global Justice Now, however, says the proposal offers mere cosmetic changes to the ISDS mechanism, to which the European public has voiced overwhelming opposition.
Nick Dearden, director of the organization, called the proposal "essentially a PR exercise to get around the enormous controversy and opposition that has been generated by ISDS. The Commission can try to put lipstick on a pig, but this new proposal doesn't change the fundamental problem of giving corporations frightening new powers at the expense of our national democracies."
"The real issue at hand here is that of corporate power," Dearden added. "Commissioner Malmstrom says she wants to 'establish a new system built around the elements that make citizens trust domestic or international courts'--but she hasn't explained why those courts are not good enough for multinational corporations to use."
Friends of the Earth Europe joined Global Justice Now in rejecting the proposal, echoing the concern that the plan ignores the vast public opposition
"The European Commission's proposal for an 'International Court System' is tarred with the same old corporate friendly brush," stated Natacha Cingotti, trade campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe. "Despite a new name and some reforms on the functioning of the system, it reaffirms the granting of VIP rights for corporate investors without giving them any obligations that would protect citizens and the environment."
"As long as companies can sue governments if they act in the public interest, the ability of governments to regulate is undermined," Cingotti stated. "It should be resisted at all costs."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.