Nous souhaiterions exprimer notre préoccupation générale face au fait que les accords internationaux d’investissement (AII) et leur mécanisme de RDIE se sont souvent révélés incompatibles avec le droit international relatif aux droits de l’homme et la primauté du droit.
We wish to express our overarching concerns that international investment agreements and their ISDS mechanism have often proved to be incompatible with international human rights law and the rule of law.
Quisiéremos expresar nuestra preocupación principal de que los acuerdos internacionales de inversión y su mecanismo del ISDS han demostrado a menudo ser incompatibles con el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos y el estado de derecho.
Investor-State dispute settlement continues to be controversial, spurring debate in the investment and development community and the public at large. States are responding to challenges and concerns surrounding ISDS through different avenues.
The next meeting of a United Nations working group debating options for reforming investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) will take place in New York from April 1 to 5.
Reform of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is being deliberated at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III, which will be meeting in New York between the 1st and 5th of April 2019.
Developing countries’ negotiators and experts discussed the way forward during the 12th Annual Forum of Developing Country Investment Negotiators held in Cartagena, Colombia on 27 February-1 March 2019.
The treaty is also a direct opposite of the Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanisms adopted in trade deals, as they expand the powers of transnational corporations.
Existing arrangements for third parties to participate in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) are not designed to protect people whose rights and interests are directly at stake.