View previous stories
	UN experts voice concern over adverse impact of free trade and investment agreements on human rights by UN Human Rights Office, agencies   2 June 2015   A number of free trade and investment agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), are currently being negotiated. A group of UN experts* have issued the following statement to express concern about the secret nature of drawing up and negotiating many of these agreements and the potential adverse impact of these agreements on human rights:   “While trade and investment agreements can create new economic opportunities, we draw attention to the potential detrimental impact these treaties and agreements may have on the enjoyment of human rights as enshrined in legally binding instruments, whether civil, cultural, economic, political or social. Our concerns relate to the rights to life, food, water and sanitation, health, housing, education, science and culture, improved labour standards, an independent judiciary, a clean environment and the right not to be subjected to forced resettlement.   As also underlined in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, States must ensure that trade and investment agreements do not constrain their ability to meet their human rights obligations (Guiding Principle 9).   Observers are concerned that these treaties and agreements are likely to have a number of retrogressive effects on the protection and promotion of human rights, including by lowering the threshold of health protection, food safety, and labour standards, by catering to the business interests of pharmaceutical monopolies and extending intellectual property protection.   There is a legitimate concern that both bilateral and multilateral investment treaties might aggravate the problem of extreme poverty, jeopardize fair and efficient foreign debt renegotiation, and affect the rights of indigenous peoples, minorities, persons with disabilities, older persons, and other persons leaving in vulnerable situations. Undoubtedly, globalization and the many Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) can have positive but also negative impacts on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, which entails practical international solidarity.   Investor-state-dispute settlement (ISDS) chapters in BITs and FTAs are also increasingly problematic given the experience of decades related arbitrations conducted before ISDS tribunals. The experience demonstrates that the regulatory function of many States and their ability to legislate in the public interest have been put at risk.   We believe the problem has been aggravated by the “chilling effect” that intrusive ISDS awards have had, when States have been penalized for adopting regulations, for example to protect the environment, food security, access to generic and essential medicines, and reduction of smoking, as required under the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, or raising the minimum wage.   ISDS chapters are anomalous in that they provide protection for investors but not for States or for the population. They allow investors to sue States but not vice-versa. The adoption in 2014 of the United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration is an important step to address the problem of the typically confidential and non-participatory nature of investor-State agreements. Greater transparency should serve to remedy incoherence between current modes of investment with human rights considerations.   We invite States to revisit the treaties under negotiation and ensure that they foster and do not hinder human rights. If the treaties in question include a chapter on investor-State-dispute-settlement, the terms of reference of the arbitrators must be so drafted that interference in the domestic regulation of budgetary, fiscal, health and environmental and other public policies are not allowed.   Moreover arbitration tribunals should allow public review and its awards must be appealable before the International Court of Justice or a yet to be created an International Investment Court working transparently and with accountability. There must be a just balance between the protection afforded to investors and the States’ responsibility to protect all persons under their jurisdiction.   We recommend that:   All current negotiations of bilateral and multilateral trade and investment agreements should be conducted transparently with consultation and participation of all relevant stakeholders including labour unions, consumer unions, environmental protection groups and health professionals.   All draft treaty texts should be published so that Parliamentarians and civil society have sufficient time to review them and to weigh the pros and cons in a democratic manner.   Ex ante and ex post human rights impact assessments should be conducted with regard to existing and proposed BITs and FTAs.   The Parties should detail how they will uphold their human rights obligations if they ratify the BITs and FTA’s under negotiation.   Given the breadth and scope of the agreements currently under negotiation, robust safeguards must be embedded to ensure full protection and enjoyment of human rights.”   (*) The experts: Mr Alfred de Zayas, Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, Ms Catalina Devandas Aguilar, Special Rapporteur on the rights of person with disabilities, Mr Dainus Puras, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Ms Farida Shaheed, Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, Ms Gabriella Knaul, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Ms Hilal Helver, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Mr Juan Bohoslavsky, Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debts and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, Mr Léo Heller, Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drink water and sanitation, Ms Victoria Lucia Tauli-Corpuz, Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, Ms Virginia Dandan, Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity.   http://www.ohchr.org/FR/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16031&LangID=E   April 2015   Secret negotiations on trade treaties, a threat to human rights – UN expert   The Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, Alfred de Zayas, expressed his deep concern over the general lack of awareness on the adverse effects that existing, or under negotiations, bilateral and multilateral free trade and investment agreements have on the enjoyment of human rights in many countries, particularly in the developing world.   “I am concerned about the secrecy surrounding negotiations for trade treaties, which have excluded key stakeholder groups from the process, including labour unions, environmental protection groups, food-safety movements and health professionals.   Proactive disclosure by governments, genuine consultation and public participation in decision-making are indispensable to make these agreements democratically legitimate.   “Fast-tracking” adoption of such treaties has a detrimental impact on the promotion of a democratic and equitable world order.   It is tantamount to disenfranchising the public and constitutes a violation of human rights law, which stipulates that every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity to take part in the conduct of public affairs.   There is a general lack of awareness concerning the adverse effects that existing bilateral and multilateral free trade and investment agreements already have on the enjoyment of human rights, including the right to health, the right to education and the right to live in a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.   Human rights impact assessments should be urgently undertaken, given the numerous treaties currently under consideration and the potential risk they represent for the enjoyment of human rights.   I am especially worried about the impact that investor-state-arbitrations (ISDS) have already had and foreseeably will have on human rights, in particular the provision which allows investors to challenge domestic legislation and administrative decisions if these can potentially reduce their profits.   Such investor-state tribunals are made up of arbitrators, mostly corporate lawyers, whose independence has been put into question on grounds of conflict of interest, and whose decisions are not subject to appeal or to other forms of accountability.   The apparent lack of independence, transparency and accountability of ISDS tribunals also entails a violation ( prima-facie) of the fundamental principle of legality laid down in international human rights law, including article 14 of the ICCPR, which requires that suits at law be adjudicated by independent tribunals.   It has been argued that ISDS tilts the playing field away from democratic accountability, favouring “big business” over the rights and interests of labourers and consumers.   The establishment of parallel systems of dispute settlement and their exemption from scrutiny and appeal are incompatible with principles of constitutionality and the rule of law, and as such are harmful to the moral welfare of society (“contra bonos mores”).   “Because all States are bound by the United Nations Charter, all bi-lateral and international treaties must conform with the Charter and its principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, sovereign equality of States, the prohibition of the threat of and the use of force and of intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of States.   Pursuant to article 103 of the Charter provisions of free trade and investment agreements, as well as decisions of ISDS arbitrators must conform with the UN Charter and must not lead to a violation, erosion of or retrogression in human rights protection or compromise State sovereignty and the State’s fundamental obligation to ensure the human rights and well-being of all persons living under its jurisdiction.   Agreements or arbitral decisions that violate international human rights law are null and void as incompatible with Article 103 of the UN Charter and contrary to international ordre public."   * Article 103 of the Charter stipulates that “in the event of conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present charter shall prevail.”   http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=15883&LangID=E   Feb 2015   Call for transparency in new generation trade deals. (The Lancet)   New proposed agreements for trade and investment threaten the ability of governments worldwide to provide affordable health care and to put in place health and environmental laws that protect public health and mitigate health inequity.   One such agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPPA), is in the final stages of negotiation between 12 Pacific-Rim countries, affecting more than 700 million people. Although USA-based industry advisers have been granted privileged access to negotiating documents, health agencies have been forced to rely on leaks for information.   As for the proposed Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the European Union and the USA, serious concerns about the health effects of the TPPA have been highlighted in medical journals and by civil society. The concerns include unprecedented expansion of intellectual property rights that would prolong monopolies on pharmaceuticals and reduce access to affordable and lifesaving generic medicines.   Effective price regulation of medicines could also be undermined. Rising medicine costs would disproportionately affect already vulnerable populations, obstructing efforts to improve health equity within and between countries.   Investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions allow investors to sue governments if policy changes or even court rulings substantially affect the value of their investment, yet do not allow governments to sue investors for breaching the right to health.   Investor state dispute settlement processes constrain governments abilities to regulate on the basis of the precautionary principle, or even to implement health policies on the basis of established evidence. These processes can have a chilling effect on efforts to address key health issues, such as alcohol, the obesity epidemic, and climate change. In New Zealand, the fear of costly ISDS litigation is already constraining government regulation on tobacco plain packaging.   As health practitioners in seven of the involved Pacific-Rim countries, we call on our governments to publicly release the full draft TPPA text, and to secure independent and comprehensive assessments of the health and human rights consequences of the proposed agreement for each nation. The assessments should evaluate the direct and indirect—and short-term and long-term—effects of the TPPA on public health policy and regulation, publicly funded health systems, the cost of medicines, and health equity; they should also be openly released to allow full public and legislative discussion before any political trade-offs are made and the agreement is signed.   http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960233-1/fulltext http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2014-09-29/europe-seeks-expand-big-pharma-monopoly-expense-poor-people-warn http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/opinion/dont-trade-away-our-health.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kill-the-dispute-settlement-language-in-the-trans-pacific-partnership/2015/02/25/ec7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html http://www.afj.org/press-room/press-releases/more-than-100-legal-scholars-call-on-congress-administration-to-protect-democracy-and-sovereignty-in-u-s-trade-deals http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/where-are-the-tpp-negotiations-up-to3f/6275624 http://www.socialplatform.org/news/the-fight-continues-for-protection-and-transparency-in-eu-us-trade-negotiations/ http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/summary.faces/en/58670/html.bookmark Visit the related web page
	Agriculture is a critical because two-thirds of Nepalis depend on farming for their livelihoods by Food & Agricultural Organization (FAO) Nepal   June 2015   Some $20 million is urgently needed to support farmers in earthquake-hit Nepal resume agricultural activities and stave off the threat of prolonged food insecurity facing an estimated one million people, FAO warned today.   To date, only 13 percent has been received of the $23.4 million in emergency agricultural assistance which FAO estimates is required, as part of the revised UN Flash Appeal for Nepal.   Two separate earthquakes and a series of aftershocks struck in April and May killing more than 8,000 people and devastating large parts of the country.   The disaster has also heavily disrupted agricultural activities threatening the livelihoods of rural families.   An FAO-led Agricultural Livelihood Impact Appraisal found that in Nepal''s six hardest-hit districts, half of all farming households lost nearly all of their stored crops of rice, maize, wheat and millet.   In addition, the earthquakes destroyed farming tools, kitchen gardens and supplies of fertilizer and caused significant damage to small-scale irrigation.   Some 16 percent of cattle and 36 percent of poultry were lost in the disaster with detrimental effects on rural household consumption and income.   "Agriculture is a critical priority because two-thirds of Nepalis depend on farming for their livelihoods," said FAO Representative in Nepal, Somsak Pipoppinyo.   Current levels of international assistance for Nepal''s earthquake-affected farmers will deliver "only a fraction" of the assistance urgently required, Somsak stressed.   "We only have a limited window to act," he added, noting how rice seeds have to be distributed urgently before the start of the heavy monsoon rains.   Many earthquake survivors are still living under corrugated iron shelters, tarpaulins or even plastic tunnels normally used for growing vegetables and are vulnerable to mudslides. Many of their animals have no shelter.   Farm support key to relief effort   The most urgent needs for the current cropping season are seeds and fertilizers, followed by irrigation, tools and technical support. The repair and functioning of irrigation systems will be critical for the winter cropping season, as well as barley and wheat seeds.   Livestock urgently require shelter, feed water, medicine and vaccinations, FAO''s appraisal noted.   The Organization has already distributed 40,000 (5 kilogram) bags of rice seeds to the six most-affected districts of Dhading, Dolakha, Gorkha, Nuwakot, Rasuwa and Sindhupalchowk, in time for farmers to plant before the monsoon.   It has also distributed airtight grain storage bags, animal feed supplements and vegetable seeds. In the coming weeks, FAO plans to distribute additional farming inputs including more vegetable seeds, wheat seeds for the winter season, mineral blocks and corrugated iron for livestock shelter.   FAO is also looking at ways of increasing the resilience of Nepal''s most vulnerable farmers to future crises. In particular, in order to avoid as much as possible,future losses of lives, properties and arable land due to landslides, options include planting deep-rooted trees and bushes, installing cages full of stones - known as gabions - to fix some highly unstable soil which has a high probability of sliding when filled with water with the coming monsoon.   In addition, FAO will look at mapping major earthquake cracks in key districts, monitoring any changes and establishing early warning systems to advise farmers of emerging landslide risks.   FAO has received around $3 million for emergency relief so far, thanks to contributions from Belgium, Italy and Norway. Visit the related web page
	View more stories