ISDS Case Map
investor-state disputes | ISDS
In the recent “RCEP 18th Round of Talks,” members of civil society organizations and social movements presented their positions vis-à-vis the RCEP.
One thing is clear: the European Commission did not obtain the full exclusive competence which it was hoping.
The proposed Multilateral Investment Court would give large corporations an exclusive justice system.
One of the most overlooked aspects of NAFTA is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement.
In the past year, some 62 Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) cases were initiated by the investors against 41 countries.
The withdrawal of Ecuador from these BITs responds to the final stage of a review process that started in 2008, and which had led to the establishment of a joint government-civil society audit commission.
The Court’s Opinion has consequences for future EU trade deals such as CETA and potentially a future UK-EU FTA.
The Court of Justice for the European Union fired a significant shot at investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and the result is likely to be much more than just a flesh wound.
The BRICS Group was born in the century XXI with renewed expectations of changes in the world order through greater participation of the Global South. However, what we have witnessed so far is the consolidation of a new/old unequal world order.
RCEP negotiations have been highly conspiratorial and undemocratic, with all 18 rounds of trade discussions held in secret and no reports shared with the public
