A group of 56 UK-affiliated academics has written to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband MP, warning that Investor-State Dispute Settlement poses a serious risk to the UK’s ability to take effective climate action.
La protección de la Amazonía es un tema central de la 30.ª Conferencia de las Partes (COP30) en Belém, Brasil. Sin embargo, los esfuerzos para garantizar su defensa corren el riesgo de perder financiación debido al mecanismo de solución de controversias entre inversionistas y Estados (ISDS).
The tribunal in the first Clive Palmer ISDS case, which claimed $300 billion from the Australian government, has published its decision 10 weeks after it was announced by the government and more than a year after the original hearings.
Proteger la Amazonía requerirá limitar la actividad económica destructiva, pero la Solución de Controversias entre Inversionistas y Estados implica que tales acciones conllevan el riesgo de costosas demandas. Este mecanismo otorga a los inversionistas extranjeros—tales como empresas petroleras y operando en la Amazonia—un derecho especial para demandar a los gobiernos en tribunales arbitrales.
The resource contains visual summaries to help break down the controversial Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism built into many trade and investment agreements.
As the UN climate conference began in Belem, Brazil last week, an official UN report explicitly called out Investor-State Dispute Settlement in trade agreements as a systemic barrier to financing climate action in developing countries.
Civil society groups are calling on the Government to leave the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and reject ISDS, as a new threat emerges over the government’s refusal to grant an exploration licence to an oil and gas company.