t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations...

4
STOP CORPORATE COURTS HAMMERING DEMOCRACY

Transcript of t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations...

Page 1: t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations have genuine grievances against a state, they should use national courts that are

Stop corporate courtS hammering

democracy

Page 2: t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations have genuine grievances against a state, they should use national courts that are

Trade and investment deals are giving big business unique powers to challenge democracy – including powerful rights to sue governments for making decisions that harm their profits.

Under a system known as Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), corporations are using secretive tribunals to sue governments for policies such as raising the minimum wage, introducing new rules to protect the environment and putting public health warnings on cigarette packaging. Across the world, taxpayers are forced to cough up billions of pounds, which could be used for healthcare or education, to ‘compensate’ corporations for democratic decisions that protect people and planet.

corporate courts: Where corporate privilege trumps human rights

Lone PIne v CanaDaOil and gas company Lone Pine is suing the Canadian government for £90 million over a moratorium on fracking in Quebec.

PhILIP MorrIS v auStraLIaTobacco giant Philip Morris, which makes Marlboro cigarettes, sued the Australian government for billions in 2011 for introducing rules for plain packaging of cigarettes. Philip Morris lost the case but the lawsuit has deterred other countries from introducing similar regulations.

Suing governments in corporate courtsangLIan water v argentInaBritish company Anglian Water sued Argentina in 2003 for freezing water rates during Argentina’s financial crisis and cancelling its water contract due to poor service. Anglian Water won the case and was awarded £13 million.VattenfaLL v gerMany

In 2009 Swedish energy corporation Vattenfall sued Germany for environmental restrictions on one of its coal-fired power plants. Germany settled by agreeing to weaken the environmental standards. In 2012 Vattenfall launched a second lawsuit for Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear energy, following the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

Page 3: t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations have genuine grievances against a state, they should use national courts that are

Design: revangeldesigns.co.uk

1. they undermine democracy ISDS gives big business the power to challenge democratic decisions and laws. Governments should be able to introduce policies that protect public health, workers’ rights and the environment and not have to hand over large sums of public money to big business to ‘compensate’ for these decisions.

2. they put governments off regulating in the public interest The threat of a potential lawsuit can put governments off introducing rules and safeguards to protect human rights or the environment. New Zealand delayed plans to introduce stricter rules on cigarette packaging after Australia was sued for introducing similar rules. Lawsuits can also cause governments to back down on policy decisions. Canada reversed a ban on a toxic chemical additive in petrol as a result of a claim initiated by Ethyl.

3. they force governments to pay billions to corporations Where a government loses a case, the compensation awarded to companies can run into billions of pounds. Public money should be spent on funding public services,

healthcare and education rather than handed over to corporate giants. Even if a corporation loses a case, the state still has to pay hefty legal bills that can dent public finances. Recent estimates show that legal costs averaged over £6m and up to £24m in some cases.

4. they enforce corporate privilege The ability to sue a government for loss of profits is an exclusive privilege given only to foreign investors and is enforced by a bespoke legal system that operates outside of national courts. Disputes are decided by three private unaccountable arbitrators who, unlike judges, have no guarantees about impartiality or independence.

5. they are unnecessary Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations have genuine grievances against a state, they should use national courts that are able to provide legal redress. There is no need for a separate legal system just for corporations. Also, most studies show that the corporate courts system does not lead to increased foreign investment.

Five reasons why we need to get rid of corporate courts

Page 4: t S democracy - globaljustice.org.uk · Corporate courts are simply unnecessary. If corporations have genuine grievances against a state, they should use national courts that are

What can be done? This attack on democratic decision-making has sparked resistance across the globe. People are mobilising in the UK, Europe and around the world to call for an end to these secretive corporate courts. The system is facing a crisis of legitimacy as countries such as Bolivia, Ecuador, South Africa, Indonesia and Tanzania are terminating investment treaties which include ISDS. The window of opportunity to push back against this unjust system of corporate privilege is now.

Join the global fightback against these corporate courts. find out more and get involved in the campaign: globaljustice.org.uk/trade

you can also sign the uK petition for ISDS to be removed from all uK trade and investment deals: globaljustice.org.uk/ISDS

global Justice now66 offley road, London Sw9 0LS +44(0)20 7820 4900 globaljustice.org.uk @globaljusticeuk [email protected]