Abstract: In short it means that Monsanto and any other Canadian (US) corporation can now sell all its/their e.g. Round-up poisoned GMO products unlabelled everywhere in the EU without obstacles via a Canadian branch- or via a dispute settlement tribunal manned with 15 judges selected by the EU and Canada (later the NAFTA) demand damages for lost profit – to be paid for by taxpayers! As only the rich Corporations can complain, the office as judge is easily susceptible to corruption.
The CETA dispute settlement court is constructed so as to change into the coming TTIP court. CETA is the second step in the NWO state development, now transcontinental and borderless under the sway of the London City owned corporations.
No EU or national laws can change decisions by the court against e.g. health, worker and environmental protection in favour of corporate profit. Thus the court is a world supreme court even in social affairs. Mussolini call this fascism.
The CETA is even incompatible with EU law since it grants special rights to foreign investors only. Once implemented it will be impossible to get rid of.
The main responsible person for CETA is EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström who in her former office successfully advocated free and safe passage of the Muslim world into the EU. Now she successfully advocates the dismantlement of Europe in favour of Rothschild´s one-world state.
Undemocratically and secretively, the EU and Canada have concluded the CETA agreement on promoting and protecting Corporations´investment for their own greater profit. CETA is to be the model for the wider Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – the core of the the New World Order.
Note the inverted pentagram-stars in this EU poster, where the restoration of the Tower of Babel demonstrates defiance against our God (Gen. 11:6-9) and worshipping of the Masonic god Lucifer and his one-world state.
EU Press Release 29 Febr. 2016: Canada agrees to protect a list of 145 European goods in Canada, such as Prosciutto di Parma and Schwarzwälder Schinken.
The members of the tribunal will no longer be appointed by the investor and the state involved in a dispute but instead appointed in advance by the Parties to the agreement.
EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstöm successfully did her worst to open Europe for resettlement of the Muslim world and here and here . Now she does her worst to dismantle Europe in favour of Rothschild´s one-world state.
Members of the dispute settlement tribunal and the appeal tribunal will, for instance, be barred from working as lawyers or experts in any other investment dispute.
An appeal system comparable to that found in domestic legal systems, meaning that decisions will be checked for legal correctness (international law – no longer national or EU law)and reversed where an error arises.
The revised CETA text includes a new article which ensures that the right to regulate for public policies is fully preserved. The article also ensures that investment protection provisions shall not be interpreted as a commitment from governments that legal frameworks will remain unchanged. This clarifies that a measure that may negatively affect an investment or affect an investor’s expectations of profits is not inconsistent with the agreement for that reason alone.
A further provision clarifies that CETA will not prevent the EU from enforcing its laws on state aid.
Establishment of the tribunal
CETA establishes a permanent Tribunal of fifteen Members which will be competent to hear claims for violation of the investment protection standards established in the agreement. The Members of the Tribunal competent to hear investment disputes will be appointed by the EU and Canada and will be highly qualified and beyond reproach in terms of ethics. Divisions of the Tribunal consisting of three Members will hear each particular case. The CETA text now follows the EU’s new approach as set out in the recently concluded EU-Vietnam FTA and the EU’s TTIP proposal.
The EU and Canada both share the objective of establishing a permanent multilateral investment court. The text of CETA recognises that such a multilateral mechanism (TTIP) will come to replace the bilateral mechanism established in CETA.
EUObserver 1 March 2016: The investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clause in the deal is set to be based on EU proposals for an Investment Court System (ICS) that were announced last autumn following unprecedented public outcry.
Plans for ISDS were among the most contentious parts of the proposed TTIP deal between the EU and US. Debate has been focused on the rights that corporations will acquire to challenge democratic decisions when they consider them a threat to their profits.
Here are 7 key reasons why “super-rights” for foreign investors remain a bad deal for citizens:
1. The commission’s investment protection proposal still offers corporations the right to sue governments over measures to protect the environment, health and workers. Tens of thousands of Canada and US-based companies operating in the EU would be newly empowered to sue.
2. Billions in taxpayer money could be paid to compensate corporations, including for missed future profits that they hypothetically could have earned. New laws in the public interest would not be shielded from such crippling compensation orders.
The proposed investor rights are a sure-fire way to bully decision-makers.
There is already evidence that proposed environmental and health protections have been abandoned, delayed or otherwise adapted to corporate wishes because of the threat of litigation.
4. The commission’s proposed multilateral investment court – essentially a world supreme court exclusively available to corporations – risks perpetuating an already gravely unjust system where large companies or wealthy individuals get powerful rights while the rest of us just get responsibilities.
5. Since only investors can sue, there is an incentive for the arbitrators (relabelled “judges” in the commission proposal) to side with them as this will bring more legal cases, fees and prestige in the future.
According to the Deutscher Richterbund, Germany’s largest association of judges and public prosecutors, “neither the proposed procedure for the appointment of judges of the ICS nor their position meet the international requirements for the independence of courts”.
6. There are doubts that the proposed investment protection system is compatible with EU law as it sidelines European courts and is fundamentally discriminatory, granting special rights to foreign investors only.
7. The ICS threatens to lock member states into it forever. It will be practically impossible for them to remove investor privileges once those are enshrined in larger trade deals such as CETA and TTIP.