Health

The investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions proposed in trade agreements give pharmaceutical corporations the right to sue governments for compensation if domestic laws negatively affect future earnings on their intellectual property or investments, and even if these laws are in accordance with public interests. Better access to medicines or preventing unsafe or ineffective medicines from entering the market could prove problematic.

Major US, Canadian and French pharmaceutical companies have recently challenged pro-public health measures through ISDS disputes brought under ISDS provisions.

Chemical corporations have also used ISDS in numerous occasions to challenge national bans on hazardous substances.

Most well-known cases include:

• Ethyl (US) vs. Canada: following Canada’s ban on the toxic petrol additive MMT, the US producer sued for US$201 million in compensation. In 1998, Canada agreed in a settlement to pay US$13 million and withdrew the ban (NAFTA invoked).

• Philip Morris Asia (Hong Kong) vs. Australia: When Australia introduced plain packaging for all tobacco products in 2011, Philip Morris sued Australia before an arbitral tribunal. In its December 2015 decision, the tribunal dismissed the case, albeit on legal grounds only. Australia spent A$24 million in legal costs but Philip Morris only paid half, leaving the Australian taxpayers to pay the other half. As a consequence of this case, countries ranging from Namibia, Togo to New Zealand decided to wait to introduce their own plain packaging for tobacco products. (Australia-Hong Kong BIT invoked)

• Dow Chemical (US) vs. Canada: the chemical corporation initiated a dispute for losses it alleged were caused by a Quebec provincial ban on lawn pesticides containing the active ingredient 2,4-D, classified as a possible carcinogen and one of the ingredients in Agent Orange, the herbicide widely used during the Vietnam war. In a settlement in 2011, the ban was sustained but Quebec was required to state that “products containing 2,4-D do not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment provided that the instructions on their label are followed.” (NAFTA invoked.)

Photo: Aqua Mechanical / CC BY 2.0

(March 2020)

IISD | 27-May-2020
Governments worldwide need the policy space now to issue economic support packages and protect their public health systems, without worrying that their budgets could face even more strain from an all-consuming wave of arbitration.
Lexology | 22-May-2020
The COVID-19 pandemic has led States to adopt various public health measures that adversely affect foreign investors and exacerbate broader economic issues. In this climate, there is significant potential for disputes under the ECT.
Cinco Días | 20-May-2020
Preparan una avalancha de demandas contra los Estados apelando a los tratados de inversión, según un informe de CEO y TNI
Basta! | 19-May-2020
Les cabinets juridiques spécialisés dans les conflits entre investisseurs et États étudient d’éventuelles plaintes contre les mesures suspendant les activités économiques, instaurant un moratoire des loyers ou rendant accessible à tous un futur vaccin.
TNI | 19-May-2020
As governments take action to fight the COVID-19 pandemic and prevent economic collapse, they could face multi-million dollar lawsuits.
Open Democracy | 19-May-2020
Research claims top law firms are preparing to ‘cash in’ on the pandemic by helping corporations sue states for measures that have impaired profits.
CIAR Global | 8-May-2020
Un grupo de prestigio de expertos del mundo académico, institucional, económico y político, respaldados por el Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment firman un manifiesto en el que piden la suspensión de los arbitrajes de inversiones mientras dure la crisis del Covid19
CCSI | 7-May-2020
We call on the world community for an immediate moratorium on all arbitration claims by private corporations against governments using international investment treaties.
Business Day | 7-May-2020
There is an imminent threat of claims arising from emergency measures, so countries should review how investor-state disputes are handled.
The Conversation | 23-Apr-2020
Global companies are positioning themselves to use little-known rules in trade agreements to claim millions of dollars in compensation for restrictions imposed during the pandemic.