How can Philip Morris sue Uruguay over its tobacco laws?
Monday, November 16, 2015
When the architects of the international order that took shape after the second world war created the United Nations, they gave the organization a lofty goal: Save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. Through the UN charter akin to a world constitution solemnly adopted in 1945 in San Francisco, they also said they were determined to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.
Since then and in line with that vow, the UN has put on the world stage not only the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but also legally binding instruments, including 10 core human rights conventions and countless declarations and resolutions.
But now more than ever, one single mechanism the little-known investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) threatens the existing system of justice, the concept of checks and balances, the very core of the rule of law. Its implications for the respect of human rights around the world are devastating. If it is allowed to continue to exist, it will hijack the dreams of a just international order born out of the second world war. It must be abolished because it undermines fundamental principles of the UN, state sovereignty, democracy and the rule of law. Far from contributing to human rights and development, the international investment regime and ISDS have resulted in growing inequality among states and within them. Article 103 of the UN charter is clear: in case of conflict between the charter and any other agreements, including ISDS, it is the UN charter that prevails.
The ISDS mechanism is a unique privatised system of arbitration, often buried in bilateral investment treaties and multilateral trade agreements (such as Nafta and TTIP). It grants an investor the right to use private dispute settlement proceedings against a foreign government, yet governments cannot sue the investors. The system is neither transparent nor accountable and often results in aberrant judgments without the possibility of appeal. Over the years, it has led to inconsistent, unpredictable and arbitrary awards contrary to national and international public order.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/16/philip-morris-uruguay-tobacco-isds-human-rights
msongs
(67,193 posts)Lithos
(26,397 posts)n/t
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)hopemountain
(3,919 posts)as their oysters on their heaping plates of resources to gluttonize, exploit and feed their bottomless pits of greed.