Sustainability and precautionary aspects of CETA dissected

elni Review ◽  
2016 ◽  
pp. 58-63
Author(s):  
Wybe Th. Douma
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Institutional Arrangements ◽  
Development Cooperation ◽  
The Self ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Sustainability Impact Assessment ◽  
The Eu

The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the EU, its Member States and Canada has been presented as “the best trade agreement the EU has ever negotiated”. While there are certainly many advantages compared to older trade treaties, two remaining points of concern are investigated in this contribution. The first one relates to the manner in which the EU utilises its own system for ensuring that sustainability concerns are integrated into trade agreements. In the first part of this contribution, it is investigated whether the manner in which the integration instrument is employed in the case of CETA, notably where the inclusion of an investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism is concerned, is in line with consistent, evidence-based policy choices and with the self-imposed guidelines as laid down in the so-called Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (TSIA) Handbook. The second part of this contribution investigates whether the continued implementation of the precautionary principle on the side of the EU is properly secured in the view of the various rules, procedures and institutional arrangements contained in the CETA text. In that respect, the findings of a detailed study on this topic are summarised first, after which some of the critique from the side of the Dutch Minister of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and from the EU Commissioner for Trade is examined and commented upon.

The New Face of CEFTA and its Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Biuković
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAmendments made to the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) in 2006 mark significant developments in the economic integration of the Western Balkans. Among those amendments were changes to the Agreement's dispute resolution mechanism. This article analyzes the latest developments in economic integration in the Western Balkans and examines the nature and operation of the dispute resolution mechanisms used in CEFTA. Explanations for important changes to the dispute settlement process in CEFTA are suggested by examining the context of the members' economic, political, social and legal surroundings. The article surveys ongoing tendencies in the development of dispute resolution mechanisms in other regional trade agreements, in particular those utilized by the European Union (EU), as a means of exploring the rationale behind the new CEFTA. It argues that the EU practice—developed in EU association agreements with third countries—has inspired the 2006 amendments to the CEFTA dispute resolution mechanism.

The CETA Opinion of the European Court of Justice and its Implications—Not that Selfish After All

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Riffel
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In Opinion 1/17, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) found the investment court system compatible with European Union (EU) law. The ruling concerned the mechanism in the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) but the Court’s reasoning is equally applicable to other investment courts as established, for example, in the EU’s investment protection agreements with Singapore and Vietnam. This outcome was far from clear, given that in the past the accession to international dispute settlement bodies regularly foundered on the autonomy of the EU legal order. The present article parses the CETA Opinion and explores its implications. It particularly focuses on autonomy as a constitutional principle and its advancement in Opinion 1/17. Importantly, the ECJ accepted the superiority of a court created by international agreement in relation to the said agreement. Furthermore, it clarified that it is not prerequisite for the Court to rule first on the meaning to be given to an act of EU law before that act can be the subject matter of an investment dispute. Finally, the pdrerogative of the EU to autonomously set the level of protection of a public welfare goal must be secured in a treaty for the EU to join it.

Transparency and participatory aspects of investor-state dispute settlement in the EU ‘new wave’ trade agreements

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 781-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Lam ◽  
Güneş Ünüvar
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Forum Shopping ◽  
New Wave ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article scrutinizes the investment chapters in the new EU Free Trade Agreements from a transparency perspective. The article examines the claims that the dispute settlement mechanisms in the new treaties are sufficiently participatory and more transparent than their predecessors. Procedural standards related to confidentiality of proceedings shall be analysed in the context of existing transparency safeguards in investment arbitration. In addition to procedural guarantees of transparency, the article examines relevant substantive rules affecting participatory aspects of dispute settlement. Furthermore, the article discusses forum-shopping strategies of the parties in the field of investment-related disputes, including internal forum-shopping and parallel proceedings using different procedural mechanisms. In this context, lessons from other fields such as international commercial arbitration related to transparency (in cases in which public interest is present) are highlighted. The proposal for the establishment of an integrated, multilateral court for investment cases is also invoked.

scholarly journals The Two Noble Kinsmen: Internal and Legal Transparency in the WTO and Their Connection to Preferential and Regional Trade Agreements

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 539-569
Author(s):  
Maria Panezi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Regional Trade Agreements ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Preferential Trade ◽  
Institutional Processes ◽  
Multilateral Trading System ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The proliferation of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) and Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) has given rise to significant debate on the need to measure, understand and possibly regulate the impact these agreements have on the multilateral trading system under the umbrella of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This article will discuss the two Doha Transparency Mechanisms (legal transparency) regarding regional trade agreements, as they appear in two General Council decisions from 2006 and 2010. I will argue based on a closer look and a consistent interpretation of Paragraph 10 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration that there is another type of transparency that is relevant to the discussion on PTAs/RTAs, namely “internal transparency.” “Internal transparency stricto sensu” highlights the significance of trust in the WTO institutional processes, such as negotiations, decision-making, dispute settlement and trade monitoring that the representatives of developing member states should have in order for the WTO system to function productively. “Internal transparency lato sensu” is introduced in this article as an extension to include any decision-making deficits, exclusionary and asymmetrical outcomes specifically in the area of unchecked Preferential Trade Agreement proliferation. Instead of a conclusion, the article offers some proposals for more a meaningful progress in the WTO with respect to PTAs/RTAs The proposals aim at raising the profile of both legal and internal of transparency and posit that raising the profile of one will inevitably lead in improvements in the other.

Emergency Keynesianism 2.0: The political economy of fiscal policy in Europe during the Corona Crisis

2020 ◽  
pp. 16-26
Author(s):  
Cornel Ban
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Fiscal Policy ◽  
Crisis Management ◽  
The Self ◽  
Fiscal Crisis ◽  
The Political ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Spending Cuts ◽  
Deep Recession ◽  
The Eu

Fiscal policy is the sum of decisions on taxation and spending that one takes in an economy, particularly in times of crisis. As such, it is of existential importance in the life of a society. Known for its recent waves of spending cuts and tax increases (austerity) during recessions (Blyth, 2013), 2020 Europe has had a more expansionary fiscal policy than ever before. How do we make sense of this shift? To answer this question, let us draw on select insights from three political economy literatures on fiscal crisis management. The first is the literature on learning. For its proponents, changes in fiscal policy are powered by evidence-based, yet politically mediated cognitive updating in the corridors of power. Plainly put, policymakers are keen students of what changes in their environment. This literature has showed that a great deal of learning took place in the EU since 2010 in particular (Schmidt, 2020; Kahkhaji and Radaelli, 2017; Dunlop and Radaelli, 2019). Its main implication for fiscal policy under corona is that between 2010 and 2015 the EU leaders learned about the limits of austerity and the virtues of more spending and tax cuts in a recession. Consequently, one would expect that when a deep recession arrives again (and it did in the spring of 2020), they would not be tempted to do a rerun of the self-defeating policies of the 2010-2012 period. As Keynes put it, “when the facts change, I change my mind.”

Internal Trade Agreements in Canada: Progress, Complexity and Challenges

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Kukucha
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
National Level ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Labour Mobility ◽  
Trade Reforms ◽  
New West ◽  
Regional Agreements ◽  
Internal Trade

AbstractDespite criticism of ongoing protectionism, this study argues that Canada's internal trade regime has evolved significantly since the implementation of the original Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). This includes thirteen formal amendments to the AIT and numerous regional agreements in Western, Central, and Atlantic Canada. Borrowing from the liberal International Political Economy (IPE) literature it argues that existing regional agreements complement and offer a potential framework for broader internal trade reforms at the national level. Of these the New West Partnership Trade Agreement (NWPTA) offers a promising model for Canada's internal market, with revised rules and norms related to negative lists, labour mobility, procurement, and investment and dispute settlement. Ongoing efforts to remove barriers will also be linked to a strengthened Internal Trade Secretariat, confidence-building measures, increased transparency and further reform of technical language.

scholarly journals Regulatory autonomy and regulatory chill in Opinion 1/17

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens Ankersmit
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

This article analyses the aspect of the Court’s reasoning in Opinion 1/17 that focuses on the regulatory autonomy of the Parties to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) to decide on levels of protection of public interests. The European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) introduction of regulatory autonomy under EU law coincides with the wider debate around ‘regulatory chill’ under international investment law. This article finds the ECJ’s concept of regulatory autonomy to be narrower than that of the regulatory chill hypothesis put forward by critics of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). It further analyses the ECJ’s reasoning that the CETA’s investment tribunals do not have jurisdiction to call into question the levels of protection sought by the EU. In so doing, it will critically evaluate the certainty of the ECJ’s promise that there will be no negative effect on public interest decision-making through CETA’s investment chapter. Finally, it will explore the legal consequences of Opinion 1/17 for future awards and investment agreements.

scholarly journals Addressing Domestic Regulation Affecting Trade in Services in CETA, CPTPP, and USMCA: Revolution or Timid Steps?

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 680-704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Ortino ◽  
Emily Lydgate
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade In Services ◽  
Novel Approaches ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Domestic Regulation ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The number of international agreements purporting to liberalise trade, mainly focused on reducing protectionist measures through the imposition of general principles, has increased greatly over the last 25 years. More recently, the United States and the European Union (EU) concluded comprehensive agreements covering trade in goods, trade in services, and foreign investment. This article inquires whether, and the extent to which, such agreements represent a departure from previous practice. It focuses on (a) the instruments employed to address domestic regulation affecting trade in services and (b) three specific agreements concluded between 2016 and 2018: the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. While these recent Preferential Trade Agreements put forward novel approaches to regulatory diversity affecting trade in services, it is too early to ascertain whether these will have any ground-breaking impact in terms of services trade liberalisation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document