TPP: If You Thought Corporate Personhood Was Bad, Wait Until You See Corporate Nationhood in the New Trade Treaty

• TPP: If You Thought Corporate Personhood Was Bad, Wait Until You See Corporate Nationhood in the New Trade Treaty
  by Scott Klinger, http://www.foreffectivegov.org/  
  The government of El Salvador was so concerned that its water was so fouled by mining companies that it passed a moratorium on new mines in 2008. Oceana Gold, an Australian corporation, didn’t like the law, so it sued El Salvador for $301 million, the amount the company said the policy cost it in lost profits.
  –
  The case was not heard in a Salvadoran court, but rather by a special, secretive corporate tribunal based in the United States and overseen by a panel of three judges, all corporate lawyers. If the tribunal rules in favor of the mining company, El Salvador has no right to appeal.
  –
  Corporations suing governments sounds like fiction, but it’s all too real.
  The El Salvador case is unfortunately not a bad science fiction story. Thanks to something known as the investor-state dispute settlement process (ISDS), which is part of the Central American Free Trade Agreement, corporations can sue if they think their interests are negatively impacted by the host country’s laws. And this is only one of a number of international trade agreements that grant corporations these special rights. To date, more than 500 suits have been filed against sovereign national governments by aggrieved corporations claiming that national laws and regulations have constrained their ability to realize the profits they counted on.
  –
  Now the push is on to approve the next big “trade” agreement – with no real public debate.
  The Obama administration has just concluded negotiations of a new global treaty called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, covering a dozen nations bordering the Pacific Ocean. These nations collectively control 40 percent of the world’s economy, making it the largest global trade treaty ever negotiated.
  –
  The TPP now must be approved by the U.S. Congress and the national legislatures of each of the other nations involved in the treaty.
  –
  The treaty is extremely controversial in part because it has been negotiated under cover of secrecy. Hundreds of U.S. corporations have been involved in the negotiations, while civil society groups – labor unions, environmental organizations, and human rights advocates – have been largely excluded. What we do know about the secret deal was leaked by a few conscientious participants in the negotiations. Documents associated with the trade deal are classified for four years after negotiations end, meaning that those who leaked the documents did so at the risk of large fines or jail time.
  –
  If the terms of the deal were made public, opposition would be so great that it would almost certainly fail, so the Obama administration is asking Congress to pass special rules called “fast track authority” that give Congress just 60 days to digest the terms of the complicated deal and then to vote it up or down – without amendment or filibuster. The clock is already ticking, and Congress is expected to vote on the fast track issue within the next few weeks.  The alternative to fast track would be open, public debate over the agreement and a fair amendment process that would allow members of Congress to alter or strike offensive provisions.
  –
  The Trans-Pacific Partnership creates special rights for corporations and threatens standards that protect our families and communities.
  –
  read more.

end