There’s no place for clean water under ‘free trade’
By Pete Dolack
Source: Systemic Disorder
April 14, 2016
Under free trade agreements (which have little to do with trade and much to do with enhancing corporate power), governments agree to the mandatory use of investor-state dispute mechanisms. What that bland-sounding phrase means is that any investor can sue a signatory government to overturn any law or regulation it does not like because the law or regulation confiscates its expected profits, with no limitations on who or what constitutes an investment. These cases are not heard in regular judicial systems, but rather in secret tribunals with no oversight, no public notice and no appeals. The judges who sit on these tribunals are corporate lawyers whose regular practice is representing corporations in these types of disputes.
Environmentalists rally for sensitive wetlands
In the latest Colombian case, that of Eco Oro Minerals, the company sued one month after the Constitutional Court of Colombia ruled that a government plan to permit mining in some portions of the countrys sensitive high-altitude wetlands is unconstitutional. Eco Oros original plan was for an open-pit mine, which was denied by the environmental ministry thanks to an organized campaign by environmentalists. Denied a permit, Eco Oro then began plans for an underground mine, and received $16.8 million in financing from the World Bank to fund a new study. The environmental ministry subsequently declared the area a protected region, rendering illegal any mine. The final chance to open a mine was ended when the Constitutional Court ruled in February 2016.
The mining company has declared Colombia in breach of its obligations and notified Bogotá of its intention to sue if a negotiated settlement cant be reached. Eco Oro issued a public statement that said, in part:
That last ruling provides the essence of free trade agreements the accumulation of corporate power to override all democratic controls over health, safety, environmental or labor safeguards. And as awful as these decisions are, worse is what would await us should the Trans-Pacific or Transatlantic partnerships go through as those agreements promise even more draconian rules than the ones already in place.
Full (long) article and links: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/theres-no-place-for-clean-water-under-free-trade/
2naSalit
(86,616 posts)must be rescinded/repealed yesteryear! There is no excuse for them and they have cause the escalation of global warming and the poisoning of large tracts of land and entire oceans.
polly7
(20,582 posts)yet another way to decimate the poor and the environment under weak gov'ts who can't fight off these horror lawsuits while further enriching those who are set upon scooping up what's left of the world's wealth and resources. They're so damned transparent .... nobody needed to wait to read them, we've already seen the terrible things NAFTA has done.
2naSalit
(86,616 posts)I am still aganst them, I was in grad school studying polisci when this was being fought over... I had a feeling it would turn out exactly the way it has. But I'm not "connected" and not wealthy and nobody really wants to hear what I think or say most of the time. If I was able to win popularity contests, I would have run for office a couple decades ago... but then, if I were popular, I would have possibly chosen a different career path. Since I don't do well in popularity contests of any kind, I have had to settle for a lot less in life than my full potential... basically being in the professional closet of hopes and dreams that might have made a difference in the way we all live.
polly7
(20,582 posts)crap trade deals through - I imagine you would have been a very powerful voice. And, I'm sure you've made a difference in your own way - popularity isn't something I find all that admirable, personally.
2naSalit
(86,616 posts)being popular a long time ago. Being a strong, intelligent female has been an albatross my entire life... you know those who are threatened by that had every opportunity, and used it, to keep me from gaining any ground in any part of life, including my own. And having not-so-pearly-white skin hasn't helped either. You think Hillary is taking some crap, at least she's white and looks white - for those who can only recognize skin color as the first consideration of validity or value.
I turn 60 this year, I'm not done yet. I have been thinking of the "what if..." part of trying to run but I think I would do much better as an advisor than anything, and I am still toying with the idea of going to law school. I think I only need something like ten credits to qualify for the board exam with my master's already in hand... had to take a few law classes for that.
I don't know, really, I probably should try to get involved at that level but I would have to be invited to participate there. So far, I have a group of MJ legalization advocates wanting me to help them with a court battle over some recent bad legislation emerging from the state legislature recently by thwarting - attempting to kill - a law we voters had voted on three times now.
Meanwhile, I'll still have to work until I drop dead on the job while forever paying rent and trying to pay off my student loans.
It's not all bad though, I do live in the northern Rockies where it's hard to find a place that isn't fabulously beautiful and amazing, at least I have that. I decided many years ago that if I was going to be poor, I would at least live in a place where I can feel good about waking up to it every morning, like bears in the driveway, the fox who marks my doorstep every evening and the occasional wolf passing through.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)All our current pending and existing deals have standstill, ratchet, and rollback clauses and attempt to privatize all service sectors where any money is taken at all for anything . Basically they define the scope of privatization very broadly and international globalization (for multinational corporations) all services have to be privatized is mandated according to the linked two line rule.