14 Amendments of Jude KIRTON-DARLING related to 2018/0358M(NLE)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU ranks fifth out of 80 foreign direct investors in Vietnam; whereas Hong-Kong, which invested in Vietnam more than all EU member states combined in 2018, recently concluded an Investment Agreement with the ASEAN which does not include ISDS or any other type of arbitration-based dispute settlement;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the agreement builds on the investment protection provisions included in the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which was ratified by Parliament on 15 February 2017; whereas this new ‘Investment Court System’ remains untested as neither the relevant provisions in CETA nor the IPA with Singapore are currently in force;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the agreement will replace and supersede the existing bilateral investment treaties between 212 EU Member States and Vietnam, which do not include the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism, the Investment Court System (ICS); whereas 6 EU member states currently have no investment treaty with Vietnam (CY, HR, IE, MT, PT, SI) and would therefore be subject to an arbitration-based dispute settlement with Vietnam for the first time as a result of the EVIPA;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the Parties have stated their commitment to pursuing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) – an initiative strongly supported by Parliament; whereas this approach was only fully supported by 7.8% of all respondents to the public consultation organised by the Commission in 2017;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replaced the investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS); underlines the fact that ICS represents a modern, innovative and reformed investment resolution mechanism; notes that it marks significantintroduces some changes in the level of substantive protection afforded to investors and the manner in which investor-state disputes are resolved although it fails to address the main flaws of ISDS in that ICS remains at odds with the principles of legal equality and legal certainty which are both cornerstones of the rule of law;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the agreement willis presented as a means to ensure a high level of investment protection and legal certainty while safeguarding the right of the Parties to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection; emphasises that the agreement will ensure transparency and accountability but also notes that this system - including the 'right to regulate’ clause - remains entirely untested and subject to substantial public criticism;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the agreement guarantees that EU investors in Vietnam will get fair and equitable treatment and will suffer no discrimination in relation to Vietnamese investors; notes that the agreement properly protects EU investors from illegitimate expropriationspecial treatment not accessible to domestic investors; notes that the agreement contains provisions to protect EU investors from illegitimate expropriation, which already exist in Vietnamese domestic legislation; notes that Chapter II of the Vietnamese Law on Investment gives foreign investors similar investment protection available to local investors, such as protection of assets and properties, investment capital, income and other investor's lawful rights and interest; notes that the Vietnamese law already prohibits expropriation by administrative measures, and provides for a right to fair compensation in cases of expropriation for national defence or security purposes (article 18.1, Law No. 15/2008/QH12); recognises that there are substantial problems in accessing remedy in the Vietnamese judicial system for foreign and domestic investors;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the ICS plans to establish a Permanent Investment Tribunal of First Instance and an Appeal Tribunal, whose members will have to possess comparable qualifications to those held by judges of the International Court of Justice, and will have to demonstrate expertise in public international law and not just commercial law, in addition to satisfying strict rules of independence, impartiality, integrity and ethical behaviour through a binding code of conduct designed to prevent direct or indirect conflicts of interests; notes that the European Association of Judges has stated that "neither the appointment, nor the term of office nor the retainer fee [provided for by the ICS model] meet with [the] requirements" of the 2010 Council of Europe's "Magna Carta of Judges"; recalls the United Nation's 1985 resolution on "Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary" which states: "Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals";
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals, which include provisions guaranteeing that case documents will be publicly available, hearings will be held in public, and interested parties will be allowed to make submissions; believes that increased transparency willcan help to instil public trust in the system, as well as ensuring that all human rights and sustainable development aspects are effectively heard by the investment tribunals although with no guarantee that these concerns will be properly taken into account in any ICS Tribunal ruling;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StressNotes that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. NoteRegrets that the EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (EVIPA) does not contain a separate trade and sustainable development (TSD) chapter, as the latter applies to investment by virtue of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EUVFTA) that liberalises it; stress; notes that the EVIPA also contains a provision establishing a legal link to the PCA, as well as specific references in its preamble to the TSD values and principles as enshrined in the EUVFTA and to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; regrets that the EVIPA places no obligations on investors to be eligible to the protection it affords, beyond disqualifying fraudulent investments; also regrets that this new system does not provide any access to remedy to the victims of human rights abuses resulting from operations of foreign investors; calls for an accompanying comprehensive EU framework on investor obligations, including mandatory due diligence provisions and respect for OECD Guidelines for multinationals;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing 21 bilateral investment treaties between EU Member States and Vietnam; considers that this constitutes an important step in increasing the legitimacy and acceptance of the internation and create new obligations for the 6 EU Member States that do not have a bilateral investment tregimeaty in place with Vietnam;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making the ICS more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and calls on the Commission to include access to remedy for human rights abuses victims and Civil Society Organisations;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14