Civil society groups say No to investors suing States in RCEP

Civil society groups say No to investors suing States in RCEP

August, July 3rd 2016. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is being negotiated in secret by 16 countries* and a leaked copy of its investment chapter includes proposals to allow foreign investors to sue governments at an international tribunal.

These investor suits can be for unlimited cash damages and compound interest. If the proposals are accepted, this investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) would allow foreign investors to sue RCEP governments if they regulate in ways that disadvantages the foreign investor, eg by reducing its profits, including by introducing new laws/policies or changing their laws/policies, even if it is for public interest reasons.

Past ISDS cases have successfully challenged health, environmental, tax, financial regulation and many other laws and a losing government in one case had to pay an investor as much as US$40billion. This is difficult enough for any government to afford, but RCEP includes three least developed countries: Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar who would find it particularly burdensome to pay foreign investors this much.

There are 696 known ISDS cases against 107 countries and the number filed each year has been rapidly increasing (the most ever were filed in 2015). These cases which broadly interpret investors’ rights and restrict governments’ ability to regulate have caused many developed and developing country governments to rethink their support for these investment protection provisions (including ISDS) in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and free trade agreement (FTA) investment chapters. For example, in RCEP countries alone:

• India and Indonesia are withdrawing from their BITs,
• Singapore’s Attorney General and the Chief Justice of Australia’s highest court have expressed concerns about ISDS and
• The New Zealand Chief Justice noted that human rights based determinations of domestic courts may give rise to ISDS claims.

In countries outside RCEP, there is also opposition to ISDS including:

• Other countries such as South Africa and Ecuador are withdrawing from their BITs,
• Germany’s Economic Minister opposes ISDS in Europe’s FTA negotiations with the USA,
• the Dutch, French and Austrian Parliaments oppose ISDS in their FTA negotiations with Canada and the USA and
• All US state-level parliaments oppose ISDS in any treaty.

Various United Nations (UN) human rights bodies have also stated their serious concerns about ISDS including 10 UN Special Rapporteurs/Independent Experts on human rights who said that the ISDS cases demonstrate ‘that the regulatory function of many States and their ability to legislate in the public interest have been put at risk’ and governments have been chilled from regulating. They recommended that in negotiations of FTAs like RCEP, the negotiating texts are published and the negotiations are conducted transparently with the participation of stakeholders including civil society.

RCEP trade ministers will meet in Laos on 5 August 2016 to try and resolve some of the issues that are stuck in the negotiations.

Given this, the 95 national and regional civil society organisations listed below which cover all RCEP countries (a number of persons requested additionally to sign on as individuals) strongly urge RCEP countries to reject ISDS in the agreement.

 *The RCEP countries are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam, Australia, China, India, Japan, Korea and New Zealand

Indonesian Version

Kelompok Masyarakat Sipil katakan Tidak

Pada Mekanisme Gugatan Investor Terhadap Negara (ISDS) dalam RCEP

 Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), perjanjian perdagangan bebas 16 negara Asia Pasifik, sedang dinegosiasikan secara tertutup dan bocoran teks bab investasi memasukan  proposal yang mengijinkan investor asing untuk menggugat pemerintah di pengadilan internasional (Investor State Dispute Settlement-ISDS).

Para investor tersebut dapat menggugat dengan nilai yang tak terbatas dan bunga berlipat. Apabila proposal ini diterima, maka ISDS ini akan mengijinkan para investor asing untuk menggugat pemerintah negara yang terlibat RCEP apabila kebijakan mereka menimbulkan kerugian untuk investor asing, misalnya mengurangi keuntungan para investor, termasuk di dalamnya mengeluarkan undang-undang/kebijakan baru ataupun mengubah undang-undang/hukum, walaupun alasannya demi kepentingan umum.

Sejumlah kasus ISDS yang lalu telah berhasil melawan bidang kesehatan, lingkungan, pajak, peraturan keuangan dan undang-undang lainnya dan mengalahkan pemerintah dimana dalam salah satu kasus pemerintah diharuskan membayar sebanyak kurang lebih US$40 milyar kepada investor.

Terdapat 686 kasus ISDS melawan 107 negara dan angkanya terus bertambah dengan cepat setiap tahunnya (kasus paling banyak terdapat pada tahun 2015). Kasus-kasus ini yang ditafsirkan sebagai hak para investor dan pembatasan bagi pemerintah untuk mengatur menyebabkan banyak pemerintah negara maju dan negara berkembang memikirkan kembali dukungan mereka untuk ketentuan perlindungan investasi tersebut (termasuk ISDS) dalam bab investasi baik perjanjian investasi bilateral (BITS) dan perjanjian perdagangan bebas (FTA).

Sebagai contoh dalam negara-negara RCEP saja:

• India dan Indonesia mencabut BITs mereka.
• Jaksa Agung Singapura dan Ketua Mahkamah pengadilan tertinggi Australia telah menyatakan keprihatinannya pada ISDS, dan
• Ketua Mahkamah Selandia Baru mencatat bahwa penetapan hak asasi manusia pada pengadilan negeri kemungkinan akan meningkatkan gugatan ISDS.

Di negara lain di luar RCEP juga terdapat perlawanan terhadap ISDS, termasuk di dalamnya:

• Negara lain seperti Afrika Selatan dan Ekuador mencabut BITs mereka,
• Menteri Keuangan Jerman menentang ISDS dalam negosiasi FTA Eropa dengan USA,
• Parlemen Belanda, Perancis dan Austria menentang ISDS dalam negosiasi FTA mereka dengan Kanada dan USA, serta
• Seluruh tingkatan parlemen Negara bagian US menentang ISDS di setiap perjanjian.

Berbagai badan HAM (PBB) juga telah menyatakan keprihatinan serius mereka mengenai ISDS termasuk 10 Pelapor Khusus PBB / Ahli Independen hak asasi manusia yang menyatakan bahwa kasus ISDS menunjukkan bahwa ‘fungsi regulasi dari banyakn egara serta kemampuan Negara dalam mengatur kepentingan umum telah terancam’ dan pemerintah gentar untuk mengatur. Mereka menyarankan agar dalam negosiasi FTA seperti RCEP, teks negosiasi harus diterbitkan dan negosiasi diselenggarakan secara transparan dengan mengikutsertakan para pihak yang terkait termasuk masyarakat sipil.

Menteri Perdagangan negara-negara peserta RCEP akan bertemu di Laos pada 5 Agustus 2016 untuk mencoba menyelesaikan beberapa isu yang menghambat di dalam negosiasi.

Mempertimbangkan hal ini, Organisasi masyarakat sipil Indonesia bersama dengan 95 organisasi masyarakat sipil tingkat nasional dan regional yang tercantum di bawah ini dari seluruh Negara peserta RCEP (termasuk sejumlah individu) mendesak dengan tegas agar negara-negara RCEP menolak ISDS dalam perjanjian.

Catatan: Negara-negara RCEP ialah Brunei, Kamboja, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Filipina, Singapura, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, China, India, Jepang, Korea dan Selandia Baru.

SIGNATORIES / PENANDATANGAN