2018/0358M(NLE) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Expresses regret at the fact that no human rights impact assessment was carried out by the EU prior to the launching of negotiations; reaffirms in the strongest possible terms that th~~Notes the lack of a human rights impact assessment by the European Commission prior to the launching of negotiations; acknowledges that the Commission responded to calls for a separate human rights impact assessment by conducting talks with stakeholders and subsequently drawing up a detailed document1a discussing in depth the FTA and IPA human rights and sustainability implications; stresses the importance of the implementation of the FTA and IPA and calls for swift adoption of the flanking measures identified in this area; recalls that an accurate assessment of the impacts of the EU-Vietnam FTA and IPA agreements will be made during the ex- post evaluation that will be pcartrie~~s to the Investment Protection Agreement (~~d out by the Commission, including through an extensive consultation of stakeholders; reaffirms in the strongest terms that the parties to the IPA) a~~nd the~~s well as investors protected by ~~it must abide by~~the IPA must respect all international human rights standards and obligations, in addition to those arising from domestic laws; reiterates its calls on the European Commission to carry out independent human rights impact assessments and ~~undertake~~conduct prior consultation with ~~the~~ individuals and communities wh~~ich could~~o may be affected by trade and investment agreements before the conclusion of future agreements; __________________ 1a Commission Staff Working Document, Human Rights and Sustainable Development in the EU-Vietnam Relations with specific regard to the to the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement, SWD(2016)21 final, 26.1.2016.

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Expresses regret at~~Deplores the flac~~t that no~~k of a human rights impact assessment ~~was carried out~~ by the EU prior to the launching of negotiations~~; reaffirms in the strongest possible terms that the parties to the Investment Protection Agreement (IPA) and the~~ particularly following the decision of the European Ombudsman of 26 February 2016, which concluded that the refusal of the European Commission to carry out a prior human rights impact assessment of the EU/Vietnam Free Trade Agreement is unjustified and constitutes a case of maladministration; recalls that the European Ombudsman, as well as the European Parliament in its urgency resolutions of 9 June 2016, 14 December 2017 and 15 November 2018, notify serious concerns regarding the protection of the human rights in Vietnam especially in relation to freedom of expression, assembly and association, religious freedom, and as regards detention of human rights activists and violence against women; reaffirms in the strongest terms that the parties to the IPA as well as investors protected by ~~it must abide by~~the IPA must respect all international human rights standards and obligations, in addition to those arising from domestic laws; calls on the European Commission to carry out independent human rights impact assessments and ~~undertake~~conduct prior consultation with ~~the~~ individuals and communities wh~~ich could~~o may be affected by trade and investment agreements before signature and ratification of EU-Vietnam IPA agreement and the conclusion of future agreements;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes with concern that ~~the~~ protections afforded to investors are outpacing the development of investor responsibilities~~; underl~~ as EU-Vietnam IPA guarantees enforceable rights to foreign investors, through the arbitration clause, but does not provide a mechanism for sanction for non- compliance with social and environmental standards; reiterates the need to give primacy for human rights and to social and environmental standards over the rights of inves,tors; underlines in this regard, the importance of an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism that can be ~~utilised by the~~seized by affected populations ~~affected~~ and that has the authority to ~~provide for~~make binding rulings with regard to the negative impact ofthat trade and investments agreements may have on human rights;, including through sanctions; further calls ~~for~~on the EU and Vietnam to take a leading role in addressing this ~~issue at~~ at multilateral level~~, by taking an active part in UN~~ through active participation in negotiations at the UN for a legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of ~~multi~~transnational corporations and other business enterprises;, which ensures access to justice for victims of human rights violations and provide mechanisms for redress and accountability for the communities affected.

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes with concern that ~~the~~ protections afforded to investors are outpacing the development of investor responsibilities; underlines, in this regard, the importance of an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism ~~that can be utilised by the populations affected and that has the authority to provide for binding rulings with regard to the~~regarding the potential negative impact ofthat trade and investments agreements may have on human rights; further calls ~~for~~on the EU and Vietnam to take a leading role in addressing this ~~issue~~ at a multilateral level~~, by taking an active part in UN~~ through active participation in constructive negotiations at the UN for a legally binding instrument to regulate, ~~in international human rights law~~at global level, the activities of ~~multi~~transnational corporations and other business enterprises;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Parties to protect ~~civil society organisations (~~CSOs) and human rights defenders ~~which seek~~; takes the view that investment and trade agreements provide an opportunity to address the ~~harmful~~ respe~~rcussions of trade~~ct of human rights in Vietnam, notably by providing and in~~vestment agreements for human rights and safeguard the environment from any attacks that might ensue;~~ stitutional framework for systematically raising these issues; calls on the Commission and Member States to use these opportunities fully in order to improve the human rights situation in Vietnam;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that Vietnam is a developing country; ~~emphasis~~underlines that in order to ~~help~~ contribute to reachi~~eve~~ng the Sustainable Development Goals, ~~notably~~in particular SDG 1 on poverty eradication, SDG 8 on decent work and SDG 10 on reduced inequalities, investment must ~~serve to foster~~contribute to the creation of quality jobs, support the local econom~~ies~~y, family farming, and fully respect domestic regulations, including tax requirements;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Recognises that the Investment 7. Court System ~~(ICS)~~ marks an improvement from the ~~current b~~existing Bilateral iInvestment tTreaties between 21 EU Member States and Vietnam related to the independence of judges and the possibility of appeal; welcomes the use of UNCITRAL transparency rules ~~from the UN Commis~~in dispute settlement provisions; but underlines that ICS fails to reform the most contentious substantive provisions o~~n International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in dispute settle~~f foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of “indirect expropriation” and of “fair and equitable treatment”, which weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental pro~~vis~~tections; emphasises that the protection of legitimate public policy decisions and the right to regulate must not be challenged byv investors; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on ~~how European investors make use of the ICS.~~the use of this provision by European investors;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Recognises that the Investment Court System ~~(ICS)~~ marks an improvement from the ~~current b~~existing Bilateral iInvestment tTreaties between 21 EU Member States and Vietnam; welcomes the use of UNCITRAL transparency rules ~~from the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)~~ in dispute settlement provisions; emphasises that the protection of legitimate public policy decisions and the right to regulate must ~~not be challenged by investors~~be ensured during the implementation of the agreement; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on ~~how European investors make use of the ICS.~~the use of this provision by European investors;

source: 632.840

2019/10/07 DEVE 17 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Recital A (new)

A. whereas the last decades have seen billion-dollar investor lawsuits against the alleged damage to corporate profit of legislation and government measures in the public interest. Whereas according to UNCTAD, the new ISDS cases in 2018 were initiated against 41 countries and as in previous years, the majority of new cases were brought against developing countries and transition economies. Developed-country investors brought most of the 71 known cases. Whereas ISDS has already been used in Vietnam, and actually, two companies are suing the Vietnamese government for receiving a tax bill after the takeover of one company (ConocoPhillips Vietnam) by another (Perenco)

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the use of the transparency rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) for dispute settlement, but underlines that the use of substantive provisions of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of ‘indirect expropriation’ and of ‘fair and equitable treatment’, does not weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, ~~such as public health, safety and environmental protec~~particularly but not exclusively public health, safety and, generally speaking, any legitimate objectives relating to public order and environmental protection, while providing foreign investors with a certain degree of legal protection, specifically against expropriation; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on the use of this provision by European investors;

Amendment 11 #

Patrizia TOIA, Pierfrancesco MAJORINO, Marc TARABELLA, Udo BULLMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the use of the transparency rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) for dispute settlement, but underlines that the use of substantive provisions of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of ‘indirect expropriation’ and of ‘fair and equitable treatment’, ~~does not~~ weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health, safety and environmental protection; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on the use of this provision by European investors;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes with concern that protections afforded to investors ~~could possibly~~are outpaceing the development of investor responsibilities as the EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (IPA) guarantees enforceable rights to foreign investors through the arbitration clause, but does not provide a sanction mechanism for non-compliance with social and environmental standards; reiterates the need to ensure a fair balance of investors’ rights and duties, in terms of corporate, social and environmental standards, in the IPA; underlines in this regard the importance of establishing an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism that can be seized by affected populations and that has the authority to make binding rulings with regard to the negative impact that trade and investment agreements may have.

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that protections afforded to investors could possibly outpace the development of investor responsibilities as the EU-Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (IPA) guarantees enforceable rights to foreign investors through the arbitration clause, but does not provide a sanction mechanism for non-compliance with social and environmental standards; reiterates the need to ensure a fair balance of investors’ rights and duties, in terms of corporate, social and environmental standards and human rights in general, in the IPA; underlines in this regard the importance of establishing an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism that can be seized by affected populations and that has the authority to make binding rulings with regard to the negative impact that trade and investment agreements may have and stresses the need to keep the European Parliament informed of action taken through this mechanism in response to complaints concerning investors with registered offices in any of the Member States.

Amendment 14 #

Patrizia TOIA, Pierfrancesco MAJORINO, Marc TARABELLA, Evin INCIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that protections afforded to investors ~~could possibly~~are outpaceing the development of investor responsibilities as the EU- Vietnam Investment Protection Agreement (IPA) guarantees enforceable rights to foreign investors through the arbitration clause, but does not provide a sanction mechanism for non-compliance with social and environmental standards; reiterates the need to ensure a fair balance of investors’ rights and duties, in terms of corporate, social and environmental standards, in the IPA; underlines in this regard the importance of establishing an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism that can be seized by affected populations and that has the authority to make binding rulings with regard to the negative impact that trade and investment agreements may have, including through sanctions; further calls on the EU and Vietnam to take a leading role in addressing this at multilateral level through active participation in negotiations at the UN for a legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises, which ensures access to justice for victims of human rights violations and provide mechanisms for redress and accountability for the communities affected.

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Reaffirms in the strongest terms that the parties to the IPA as well as investors protected by the IPA must respect all international human rights standards and obligations, in addition to those arising from domestic laws; calls on the Parties to take account of internationally agreed principles and instruments such as those of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN guiding principles on business and human rights, as well as the UN Principles for Responsible Investment and Reporting;

Amendment 16 #

Patrizia TOIA, Pierfrancesco MAJORINO, Marc TARABELLA, Udo BULLMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 (new)

4. Calls for the abolition of all kind of arbitrations system in the Investment treaties that allow companies and investors to sue governments if new legislation and regulations for public interests undercut their ability to make profits;

Amendment 17 #

Stéphane BIJOUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 (new)

4. Points out that the provisions of the Investment Protection Agreement and Free Trade Agreement must be implemented in a complementary manner, especially with regard to human, environmental and social rights and sustainable development; stresses also the need to ensure consistency with development cooperation objectives under Article 208 TFEU;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Recalls that Vietnam is a developing country; underlines that in order to contribute to reaching the Sustainable Development Goals, in particular SDG 1 on poverty eradication, SDG 8 on decent work and SDG 10 on reduced inequalities, investment must contribute to the creation of quality jobs, support the local economy and fully respect domestic regulation including tax requirements;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Parties’ commitment to enhance the contribution of trade and investment to the goal of sustainable development in its economic, social and environmental dimensions; Acknowledges that the Investment Court System marks an improvement from the existing Bilateral Investment Treaties between 21 EU Member States and Vietnam with regard to the independence of judgesAcknowledges that the Investment Court System will replace the existing Bilateral Investment Treaties between 21 EU Member States and Vietnam with regard to ISDS mechanisms. Recalls that the ICS still remain an investment arbitration system and continues to give a privileged status to investors, and does not provide a sanction mechanism for investors non-compliance with social and environmental standard;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Underlines the Parties’ commitment to enhance the contribution of trade and investment to the goal of sustainable development in its economic~~, social and environmental dimensions~~ and social dimensions, particularly with regard to international labour law resulting from the core conventions adopted by the International Labour Organisation, and in its environmental dimensions, in particular measures to combat deforestation and illegal fishing; acknowledges that the Investment Court System marks an improvement from the existing Bilateral Investment Treaties between 21 EU Member States and Vietnam with regard to the independence of judges;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Expresses its general concern at the increasing inclusion in recent EU free trade agreements of arbitration clauses referring to a specific court; stresses that such arrangements must be confined to cases involving the possibility of manifest and serious abuses and must not be allowed to compromise the sovereignty of the Member States;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Deplores the fact that no human rights impact assessment was ever carried out prior to the launching of negotiations; recalls that the European Ombudsman, as well as the European Parliament in its urgency resolutions of 9 June 2016, 14 December 2017 and 15 November 2018, notify serious concerns regarding the protection of the human rights in Vietnam especially in relation to freedom of expression, assembly and association, religious freedom, and as regards detention of human rights activists and violence against women; notes with great concern that the human rights situation in Vietnam keeps deteriorating, ever since the implementation of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) in 2012 and since the conclusion of the EVFTA in 2016, notably for human rights defenders in Vietnam;

Amendment 7 #

Patrizia TOIA, Pierfrancesco MAJORINO, Marc TARABELLA, Udo BULLMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Reaffirms in the strongest terms that the parties to the IPA as well as investors protected by the IPA must respect all international human rights standards and obligations, in addition to those arising from domestic laws; takes the view that tangible improvements on human rights in Vietnam is a key precondition to the ratification of the Investment Protection Agreement and calls for the inclusion of an enforceable Human Right Clause, which include mechanism for redress and accountability in relation to communities affected, considering that the human rights mechanism under the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) has proved to be ineffective to address grave and systematic human rights violations;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the use of the transparency rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) for dispute settlement~~, but underlines that the use of substantive provis~~; emphasises that the protections of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of ‘indirect expropriation’ and of ‘fair and equitable treatment’, does not weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health, safety and environmental protectionlegitimate public policy decisions and the right to regulate must not be challenged by investors; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on the use of this provision by European investors;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Welcom~~Acknowledges the use of the transparency rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) for dispute settlement, but underlines that the use of substantive provisions of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of ‘indirect expropriation’ and of ‘fair and equitable treatment’, ~~does not~~can weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health, education, labour rights, safety and environmental protection; insists on regular monitoring and reporting back to the European Parliament on the use of this provision by European investors;

source: 641.387

2019/11/13 INTA 76 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Jan ZAHRADIL, Geert BOURGEOIS

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

- having regard to the Opinion of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 30 April 2019, pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU, requested on 7 September 2017 by the Kingdom of Belgium,

Amendment 10 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas Vietnam is a vibrant economy with the fastest growing middle class in ASEAN and has a young and dynamic workforce, a high literacy rate, high education levels, comparatively low wages which will represent, combined to the end of all tariffs, a strong incentive for EU companies to outsource more European manufacturing jobs, good transport connections and a central location within ASEAN;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas Vietnam’s infrastructure and investment needs massively exceed public funds currently available;

Amendment 12 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas in 2017, Vietnam received FDI worth 8 % of its GDP – more than double the rate received by economies of a similar scale in the region – among of which China has now become first foreign investor, notably in the manufacturing sector, giving Chinese companies even more capabilities of exporting to Europe;

Amendment 13 #

Emmanuel MAUREL

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. ~~welcoming~~notes the fact that contrary to human rights, rule of law and independence of civil society, the trade, business and investment environment has improved significantly in Vietnam over the last few decades;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas in 2016 the Formosa steel plant owned by a Taiwanese company caused a massive environmental disaster by spilling chemical waste into the sea; whereas the environmental and economic impacts were huge undermining the livelihood of many small and artisanal fishermen; whereas the Vietnamese authorities responded to the civil protests that followed by a heavy crack down and arrests to the point of raising serious concerns in the international community; whereas the Vietnamese judicial system does not allow for adequate redress mechanisms for the victims of human rights violations, including in connection to economic activities; whereas the European Commission decided to not conduct a human rights impact assessment on the IPA;

Amendment 15 #

Bernd LANGE, Biljana BORZAN, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Inma RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO

G. whereas this is - after the EU- Singapore Investment Protection Agreement - the second ‘standalone investment protection agreement’ concluded between the EU and a third country following discussions by the European institutions on the new architecture of EU FTAs, on the basis of the opinion of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) 2/15 of 16 May 2017, which will serve as reference point for future EU engagement with its trading partners;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
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; emphasises that the new public Investment Court System was integrated into the already finalised CETA agreement by the European Parliament's efforts, thereby replacing the old private ISDS-system.

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
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 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
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 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13

— having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2017 on freedom of expression in Vietnam, notably the case ~~of Nguyen Van Hoa8 ,~~ condemning the sentencing Nguyen Van Hoa8 to seven years in prison because of his "legitimate use of freedom of expression; expressing Europe’s concern about the rise in the number of detentions" (which have risen even more rapidly since 2017); "calling on the Vietnamese authorities to release all citizens detained for peacefully exercising their freedom of expression"; "expressing serious concerns about the extensive application of the national security provisions in Vietnam’s Penal Code and urging the Government of Vietnam to amend it deeply", "denouncing Vietnam’s use of death penalty", "recalling the importance of Human Rights Dialogue between EU and Vietnam as a key instrument to be used to encourage Vietnam in the implementation of the necessary reforms" ; _________________ 8 OJ C 369, 11.10.2018, p. 73.

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas the EU's ICS (International Court System) still remains an investment arbitration system;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)

I b. whereas the last decades have seen billion-dollars investor lawsuits against the alleged damage to corporate profit of legislation and government measures in the interest of the public;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)

I c. whereas, according to UNCTAD, the new ISDS cases in 2018 were initiated against 41 countries and as in previous years, the majority of new cases were brought against developing and transiting-economy countries, mostly by developed-country investors;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas on 30 April 2019 the CJEU ruled that the mechanism for the resolution of disputes between investors and States provided for by CETA is compatible with EU law14 ; whereas the CJEU drew such conclusion on the basis of the fact that, since the EU legislation is anchored in the Treaties’ principles of proportionality and necessity to achieve public policy objectives , there is a presumption of compatibility with investment protection obligations and that ICS has no jurisdiction to declare the level of protection of a public interest established by EU measures incompatible with CETA; _________________ 14 Opinion of the Court of Justice of 30 April 2019, 1/17.

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
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 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Parties have stated their commitment to pursuing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) – an initiative strongly supported by Parliament's previous legislature;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Parties have stated their commitment to pursuing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) ~~– an initiative strongly supported by Parliament~~;

Amendment 27 #

Iuliu WINKLER, Enikő GYŐRI, Massimiliano SALINI

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Parties have stated their commitment to pursuing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) – an initiative strongly and continuously supported by Parliament;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes 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 significant change in the level of substantive protection afforded to investors and the manner in which investor-state disputes are resolved; recalls that the establishment of an independent multilateral investment court would give greater legal certainty to all parties; welcome the strong commitment of Viet Nam to the rules- based multilateral trading system;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes~~Takes 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 significant~~introduces 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 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14

— having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2018 on Vietnam, notably the situation of political prisoners9 , deploring that "Vietnamese authorities continue to imprison, detain, harass and intimidate human rights defenders, journalists, bloggers, human rights lawyers and civil society activists in the country"; reiterating its previous year’s "call on the Vietnamese authorities to end all restrictions and acts of harassments against human rights defenders"; and once again "calling on the authorities of Vietnam to repeal, review or amend all repressive laws and releasing all political prisoners" without any tangible results other than silence and continued repression ; _________________ 9 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0459.

Amendment 30 #

Bernd LANGE, Biljana BORZAN, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes 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 significant change in the level of substantive protection afforded to investors and the manner in which investor-state disputes are resolved; regrets, however, that the scope of application still extends slightly beyond mere non-discrimination between foreign and domestic investors

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Notes theat 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 significant change in the level of substantive protection affor~~n investment resolution mechanism quite similar to the previous one, given the fact that like ISDS, it provideds to investors a~~nd the manner in which investor-state disputes are resolved~~ parallel and privileged justice system and does not provide any sanction mechanism against investors who don't comply with human rights obligations or social and environmental standards;

Amendment 32 #

Iuliu WINKLER, Enikő GYŐRI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Notes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has re~~plac~~formed 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 significant change in the level of substantive protection afforded to investors and the manner in which investor-state disputes are resolved~~ as regards its procedural shortcomings; notes however that it perpetrates the asymmetry and imbalance between investors’ rights and obligations since only rights are protected like under the older ISDS;

Amendment 33 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement will 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; asks the Commission to further take into account the fight against climate change and the respect of the Paris Agreement in safeguarding the right of the parties to regulate, as it has been done with CETA;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement will 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; welcomes the EU’s new approach to Investment Protection and its enforcement mechanism of ICS which enhances the quality of individual approaches of bilateral investment treaties concluded by EU MS;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement will 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 environ~~; regrets that a similar level of ambition has not been reached for the enforcement of sustainable development provisions; further notes that, contrary to CETA, EVIPA is deprived of a joint interpretative instrumental pro~~tection; emphasis~~viding additional guarantees to th~~at the agreement will ensure transparency and accountability~~e right to regulate of the Parties, which was taken into account by the CJEU to draw its conclusions on CETA;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement ~~will~~is 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 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
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 expropriation~~special 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 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that the agreement guarantees that EU investors in Vietnam will get fair and equitable treatment contrary to Vietnamese citizens, will be protected from denial of justice in criminal or civil proceedings, manifest arbitrariness, targeted discriminations such as gender, race or religious belief, abusive treatment such as coercion or abuse of power contrary to Vietnamese citizens, and will suffer no discrimination in relation to Vietnamese investors; notes that the agreement ~~properly~~, while protectsing EU investors from ~~illegitimate expropria~~"indirect expropriation", can weaken the Parties' right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy goals such as public health, education, labour rights, safety and environmental protection;

Amendment 4 #

Bernd LANGE, Biljana BORZAN, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Inma RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 18

— having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Title V thereof on the Union’s external action and specifically Article 21,

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
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 expropriation; regrets that protection against discriminatory measures does not go hand-in-hand with obligations for investors to exercise due diligence with regard to sustainable business practices in compliance with human rights and international labour conventions as well as environmental standards.

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
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~~which is a higher standard of protection than national treatment; notes that the agreement properly protects EU investors from illegitimate expropriation;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
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 43 #

Bernd LANGE, Biljana BORZAN, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Inma RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO

Motion for a resolution
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; is concerned about the inability of Vietnamese judges to comply with all those requirements given the situation of the judiciary system and of the rule of law in the country; recalls that the independence of the judges is one of the criteria taken up by the CJEU to draw its conclusions on the compatibility of CETA;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 45 #

Iuliu WINKLER, Enikő GYŐRI

Motion for a resolution
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 will 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; additionally welcomes the clarity regarding the grounds on which an investor can challenge, which ensures additional transparency and fairness of the process;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
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 ~~will~~can 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 47 #

Motion for a resolution
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 will help to instil public trust in the system~~, as well as ensuring~~; regrets that ~~all~~ human rights and other sustainable development aspects are ~~effectively heard by the investment tribunal~~not covered by ICS as substantive investors’ obligations;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs but without proper legal standing in front of the tribunal; underlines that the investment court still constitutes a separate system for foreign investors only; demands that investor rights should be balanced by an equivalent legal mechanism accessible by trade unions and other stakeholders to enforce the investors obligations;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that third parties (such as labour and environmental organisations ) theoreticanl contributeions to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs are not sufficient to guarantee equal status to civil society actors compared to that guaranteed to investors;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)

- having regard to the Council Conclusions on Child Labour of 20 June 2016 encouraging the Commission to continue exploring ways to use more effectively the trade instruments of the European Union, including Free Trade Agreements to combat child labour;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Stress~~Notes that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Regrets that a global approach to corporations’ compliance with human rights law and the availability of remedy mechanisms are lacking; warmly welcomes the work initiated in the UN by the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights on the establishment of a binding UN instrument; calls for a binding treaty to include mechanisms for coordination among states on investigating and prosecuting cross-border cases, and proposes companies are accountable for human rights violations in the forum where the harm was caused, or the forum where the parent company or subsidiary is incorporated; urges the EU and Member States to engage genuinely and constructively in the negotiations;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Regrets the lack of provisions on investors’ obligations, including binding corporate social responsibility standards; calls on the Commission to propose legislation laying down mandatory and enforceable due diligence standards in sectors other than conflict minerals and timber, such as the garment industry;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recalls that the agreement represents an improvement on the investment protection provisions in CETA, as it incorporates provisions on obligations for former judges, a code of conduct to prevent conflicts of interests, and a fully functioning Appeal Tribunal at the time of its conclusion; stresses however that, contrary to CETA, EVIPA is deprived of a Joint Interpretative Instrument providing additional protection to the right to regulate;

Amendment 54 #

Jytte GUTELAND, Inma RODRÍGUEZ-PIÑERO, Evin INCIR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Note~~Regrets 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 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes 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; stresses 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; underlines that the Parties and investors must respect all relevant international human rights standards and obligations; stresses the responsibilities of investors according to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;

Amendment 56 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes 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; stresses 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; points out that the provisions of the EVIPA and the EUVFTA must be implemented in a complementary manner, especially with regard to human, environmental and social rights and sustainable development;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that since 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~~market access under the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EUVFTA) that liberalises it; stresses 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; is of the view that TSD chapters’ rules, principles and references to the international commitments of the Parties could have contributed to strengthening their right to regulate;

Amendment 59 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Notes with concern that the Vietnamese penal code still allows for serious human rights violations, which have intensified since the entry into force of the PCA; calls on a Vietnam to revise the penal code in line with international standards and welcomes the European Union's assistance in this respects; regrets that the Commission has failed to undertake a comprehensive human rights impact assessment of the EVIPA; calls on the Commission to carry out such an assessment;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 b (new)

- having regard to the Council Conclusions “Towards an ever more sustainable Union by 2030” of 9 April 2019 in which the Council underlines the urgent need for accelerating the implementation of the 2030 Agenda both globally and internally, as an overarching priority of the EU, for the benefit of its citizens and for upholding its credibility within Europe and globally;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Is concerned that human rights violations stemming from foreign investors’ activities cannot be addressed under the IPA and that no concrete action can be taken in the framework of that agreement; requests therefore the addition of a monitoring mechanism as well as a grievance mechanism under the IPA through an additional Protocol to the IPA, whereby potential and actual violations can at least be prevented or remedied through mediation;

Amendment 61 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Points out that a new Vietnamese Cyber Security Law, that entered into force at the beginning of 2019, has attracted a lot of criticism, as an intensified crackdown on human rights activists in the country has been documented, linked to the provisions of this new law which gives the authorities licence to censor content, control information and silence online dissidents; notes with regret that the legislation also raises concerns for EU economic interests, including forced data localisation provisions which are at odds with the EU's liberalisation agenda in this respect; calls on Vietnam to revise this law in line with international standards and welcomes the European Union's assistance in this respect;

Amendment 62 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Underlines the need for close monitoring of the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam; Calls for a joint parliamentary scrutiny board, basing itself on the monitoring Group for Vietnam in the European Parliament and its equivalent in the Vietnamese National Assembly, which will be tasked to monitor the implementation of the agreement and the human rights developments in Vietnam;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Believes that an arbitration International Court should fit the following qualifications : - falling under the auspices of an independent multilateral body such as the United Nations, - being transparent in its appointments and proceedings, - applying human rights, labour and environmental treaties.

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
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 international investment regime;~~

Amendment 65 #

Iuliu WINKLER, Enikő GYŐRI, Massimiliano SALINI, Christophe HANSEN

Motion for a resolution
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 tre~~gime~~aty in place with Vietnam;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making the ICS more accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); underlines the potential for growth and significant benefits that are hereby made available to European Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, considering this sector of the economy of vital interest for European prosperity and innovation;

Amendment 67 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ECalls on the Commission to take accompanying measures for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with this agreement in order to make it transparent and accessible; encourages the Commission to continue its work on making the ICS more accessible to ~~small and medium-sized enterprises (~~SMEs);

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
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 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making the ICS more~~Recalls that ICS and arbitration systems are hardly accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 c (new)

- having regard to the Council Conclusions on Business and Human Rights of 20 June 2016 that stipulates that “the EU recognises that corporate respect for human rights and its embedding in corporate operations and value and supply chains is indispensable to sustainable development. and achieving the SDGs. All partnerships in implementing the SDGs should be built on respect for human rights and responsible business conduct” and that “the Council encourages EU companies to establish operational-level grievance mechanisms, or create joint grievance initiatives between companies” ;

Amendment 70 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13 a. Calls on both Parties to undertake to develop programmes of cooperation activities to improve capacity and conditions for women to benefit from opportunities created by the agreement, including encouraging capacity building and skills enhancement of women at work and in business, fostering women's representation in decision making and positions of authority; improving women's access to, and participation and leadership in, science, technology and innovation; conducting gender-based analysis and gender-focused statistics relating to investments;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

~~14. Considers that the approval of this agreement will robustly protect investors and their investments on both sides while safeguarding the governments’ rights to regulate;~~deleted

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the approval of this agreement will ~~robustly~~ protect investors and their investments; on ~~both sides while safeguarding the governments’ rights to regulate~~the other hand, is of the view that, following the CJEU ruling on CETA important questions remain answered such as (i) the effects of ICS judges not being bound by the ECJ ruling and that fact that they may therefore draw conclusions contradicting the CJEU interpretation; (ii) the consequences in case ICS judges call into question the level of protection set by the EU and on that basis award damages; (iii) how to ensure the ICS judges will comply with the CJEU interpretation; Therefore believes that a protocol clarifying such questions in the form of an interpretative instrument should be included in the agreement before ratification;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the approval of this agreement will robustly protect investors and their investments on both sides while safeguarding the governments’ rights to regulate; calls upon Member States for a swift ratification of the agreement in order to ensure that all its benefits are available to all stakeholders at the earliest time possible;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the approval of this agreement will ~~robustly protect investors and their investments on both sides while safeguarding th~~give a privileged status to investors and may jeopardize governments’ rights to regulate;

Amendment 75 #

Karin KARLSBRO, Barbara Ann GIBSON, Samira RAFAELA, Jordi CAÑAS, Urmas PAET, Elsi KATAINEN, Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Welcomes the agreement which will create more free and fair trade opportunities between the EU and Vietnam; urges the European Parliament to give it consent to the agreement, given that Vietnam takes steps to improve the civil and labour rights situation as to move in the direction of its commitments;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Withholds its consent until the Investment Protection Agreement is completed by the addition of an independent monitoring mechanism as well as a grievance mechanism;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)

-A. whereas, in the mission letter sent to all Commissioners-designate, President-elect von der Leyen insisted that “each Commissioner will ensure the delivery of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals within their policy area”;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
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;

source: 643.174

2019/11/14 AFET 41 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that economic development and multilateralism are important tools to improve people’s lives; points out that one of the objectives of the IPA is to strengthen the economic, trade and investment relationship between the EU and Viet Nam in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, and to promote trade and investment ~~in a manner that is mindful of~~under this Agreement in full compliance with international human rights, high levels of environmental and labour protection and relevant internationally recogni~~sed standards and agreements~~zed standards and agreements; regrets, in this regard, that the text of the sustainable development chapter does not create any binding obligation but only permits to mobilize a panel of experts with the non- binding power to issue recommendations and promote a dialogue;

Amendment 10 #

Manu PINEDA, Marisa MATIAS, Miguel URBÁN CRESPO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that all parties must uphold human rights and, in this respect, the French Government should take responsibility for the crimes it committed in Vietnam during the colonial period, including the imprisonment of 20 000 Vietnamese resistance fighters in the Poulo-Condor concentration and forced labour camp; takes the view, therefore, that any agreement with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam should require the French authorities to provide a list of all those Vietnamese resistance detainees who were imprisoned and died on the island of Côn Đảo during the French occupation;

Amendment 12 #

Traian BĂSESCU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that under ~~Artic~~Title 35VI of the PCA, the Parties agree to cooperate in the promotion and protection of human rights, and in the fields of gender equality, climate change, migration, health, education and training, socio-economic affairs, and a reform of public administration to ensure that the high standards and values promoted by the EU are exported abroad and reflected in upcoming reforms in Viet Nam, including with regard to the implementation of international human rights instruments to which they are parties;

Amendment 13 #

Jytte GUTELAND

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that under Article 35 of the PCA, the Parties agree to cooperate in the promotion and protection of human rights, including with regard to the implementation of international human rights instruments to which they are parties; underlines that the Parties and investors must respect all relevant international human rights standards and obligations; stresses the responsibilities of investors according to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;

Amendment 14 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that under Article 35 of the PCA, the Parties agree to cooperate in the promotion and protection of human rights, including with regard to the implementation of international human rights instruments to which they are parties; notes with concern that it has proved to be insufficient as serious human rights violations have continued since the entry into force of the PCA;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that under Article 35 of the PCA, the Parties agree to cooperate in the promotion and protection of human rights, including with regard to the implementation of international human rights instruments to which they are parties; notes with concern that serious human rights violations have intensified since the entry into force of the PCA;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Fully supports ~~the~~a genuine and result-oriented engagement on human rights ~~dialogue~~ between the EU and Viet Nam, ~~which is a very effective way to discuss issues related to human right~~including within the framework of the bilateral human rights dialogue and other senior level meetings; calls for the strengthening of the annual EU-Viet Nam human rights dialogue ~~wit~~through the involvement of ~~local and international civil society and taking into account~~independent local civil society organisations and human rights defenders; stresses in that respect that the European Commission and EEAS need to be particularly attentive to the fact that independent civil society has been harshly repressed and largely operates underground for fear of persecution and retaliations; insists on the importance in raising individual cases and following up on their situation during these dialogues; calls for information received from relevant international organisations to be taken into account in those dialogues;

Amendment 17 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Jytte GUTELAND, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

4. Fully supports the human rights dialogue between the EU and Viet Nam, which is a ~~very effective~~ way to discuss issues related to human rights; regrets the lack of any tangible result after several rounds of EU- Vietnam human rights dialogues; further regrets that on at least two occasions Vietnam detained activists right before the dialogues; calls for the strengthening of the annual EU-Viet Nam human rights dialogue with the involvement of local and international civil society and taking into account information received from relevant international organisations; calls for the dialogue to be geared around concrete deliverables; notes with concerns that Vietnamese independent civil society has been violently repressed and largely operates underground for fear of persecution and retaliations;

Amendment 18 #

Martin HORWOOD, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Ilhan KYUCHYUK, Irina VON WIESE, Urmas PAET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Fully supports the human rights dialogue between the EU and Viet Nam, which is a ~~very effective~~ way to discuss issues related to human rights; regrets that during these dialogues Vietnam upholds the view that it needs to preserve stability as a priority over the respect for human rights; calls for the strengthening of the annual EU-Viet Nam human rights dialogue with the involvement of local and international civil society and taking into account information received from relevant international organi~~sation~~zations; calls for the dialogue to be geared around concrete deliverables;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Fully supports the human rights dialogue between the EU and Viet Nam, which ~~is a very effective way to discuss~~allows for issues related to human rights to be continuously discussed; calls for the strengthening of the annual EU-Viet Nam human rights dialogue with the involvement of local and international civil society and taking into account information received from relevant international organisations;

Amendment 2 #

Traian BĂSESCU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 20 #

Fabio Massimo CASTALDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recognises the vital work of Human Rights Defenders in the democratic process; highlights that the situation of HRD in Vietnam has recently deteriorated and that the number of HRD arrested in 2018 is higher than the number of those arrested between 2013 and 2017; calls for the European Commission and the Government of Viet Nam for the release of all arbitrarily detained human rights, labour, religious and environmental activists, journalists and bloggers, including Tran Huynh Duy Thuc, Hoang Duc Binh, Tran Thi Nga, Le Dinh Luong, Ngo Hao, Luu Van Vinh, Ho Duc Hoa, Tran Anh Kim, Nguyen Trung Ton, Nguyen Trung Truc, Truong Minh Duc, Le Thanh Tung, Nguyen Van Duc Do, Tran Thi Xuan and Ho Duc Hoa;

Amendment 21 #

Martin HORWOOD, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Ilhan KYUCHYUK, Irina VON WIESE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recognises that civil society in Viet Nam is not allowed to operate freely and unrestricted from state interference; is concerned that the establishment of the Domestic Advisory Groups (DAGs), as per the Agreement, could be undermined by the lack of freedom of expression, assembly and association in Viet Nam, which has often been used by state authorities to intimidate, silence and restrict the work of civil society organisations; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to ensure that civil society groups included in the DAGs will be allowed to operate independently, impartially, thoroughly, and safely from any repercussions

Amendment 22 #

4a. Regrets the lack of provisions on investors’ obligations, including binding corporate social responsibility standards; calls on the Commission to propose legislation laying down mandatory and enforceable due diligence standards in sectors such as the garment industry;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Calls on the EU and Vietnam to set up, through an additional Protocol to the IPA, an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism on human rights providing affected citizens and local stakeholders with effective recourse to remedy and a tool to address potential negative impacts on human rights arising from the IPA;

Amendment 24 #

Martin HORWOOD, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Ilhan KYUCHYUK, Irina VON WIESE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Underscores the importance ~~of the 5. IPA~~IPA should have in contributing to raising living standards, promoting economic growth and stability~~, helping advance the~~; regrets the lack of a binding and enforceable trade and sustainable development chapter that would help advancing rule of law, good governance, sustainable development and respect for human rights in Viet Nam, while also enabling the EU to foster its objectives of peace and stability in the region.; regrets that human rights and other sustainable development aspects are not covered by ICS as investor´s obligations;

Amendment 25 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Underscores the importance of the IPA in contributing to raising living standards, promoting economic growth and stability, ~~helping advance the rule of law, good governance, sustainable development and respect for human rights in Viet Nam,~~ while also enabling the EU to foster its objectives of peace and stability in the region.

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Underscores the importance of the IPA in contributing to raising living standards, promoting ~~economic growth~~prosperity and stability, helping advance the rule of law, good governance, sustainable development and respect for human rights in Viet Nam, while also enabling the EU to foster its objectives of peace and stability in the region.; stresses that unequivocally upholding those universal values is a conditional part of any agreement between the EU and a third state; calls on the Commission to ensure that human rights benchmarks are fully respected after the agreement enters into force;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Regrets that Vietnam's penal code de facto criminalises criticising the government, therefore makes it nearly impossible to ensure free, open and independent monitoring of the implementation and the impact of the FTA and PCA, as well as to fully enjoy the labour rights enshrined in the ILO core conventions that Vietnam has ratified or has pledged to ratify;

Amendment 28 #

5b. Regrets the lack of a human rights impact assessment and calls on the Commission to carry one out, prior to the entry into force of the agreement

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Deeply regrets that the IPA contains no obligation for businesses to respect human rights and that the clause only encourages and promotes voluntary commitments; therefore calls for a binding clause for the States to fully comply and respect human rights.

Amendment 3 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Jytte GUTELAND, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 30 #

Manu PINEDA, Marisa MATIAS, Miguel URBÁN CRESPO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. Believes that improvement of the rule of law, good governance, sustainable development and the respect for human rights in Viet Nam are necessary; Recommends that the European Parliament should consider giving its consent only when the government of Viet Nam has agreed a timetable with the EU Commission for the improvement of human rights in Viet Nam including proposals for revisions to those aspects of the penal code that currently legislate against freedom of speech, association and assembly;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that the fight for justice for the millions of Agent Orange victims and detoxification of the soil should be a top priority in future EU-Vietnam agreements; takes the view that the San Francisco judgment of 10 August 2018 against Montsanto has created a solid legal basis for solving similar issues; reiterates, therefore, that the EU should do everything in its power to support a comprehensive plan of action to tackle the environmental and human damage caused by Agent Orange, including supporting the Vietnam Association For Victims Of Agent Orange/Dioxin (VAVA) in its legal action against US chemical companies that produce Agent Orange;

Amendment 32 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Regrets that the European Commission conducted negotiations with Vietnam towards an IPA without carrying out a human rights impact assessment, thereby violating its own commitments and obligations, and calls on the Commission to carry out one, prior to the entry into force of the agreement

Amendment 33 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Regrets that the regimes instituted by the investment protection agreement has insufficient clauses to compel states to respect, protect and implement human rights and have limited guarantees for people whose fundamental rights are violated by the investor or the host State to have an effective recourse;

Amendment 34 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Calls, for the establishment of an independent complaint mechanism, providing affected citizens and stakeholders with effective recourse in order to address potential negative impacts on human rights;

Amendment 35 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. Notes that ICS jurisprudence is insufficient to secure an interpretation conform to human rights standards and investment tribunals have often not taken them into account adequately;

Amendment 36 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)

5e. Believes that the asymmetrical nature of the ICS system, the lack of human rights obligations of investors and the exorbitant costs associated with ICS limit the access and the remedy for civil society; requires that this system does not restrict the ability of the State to fulfil its obligation to protect human rights or prevent businesses from respecting these rights;

Amendment 37 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)

5f. Calls to reform the ICS system in order to ensure that this investment tribunal is able to systematically and rigorously apply international human rights law, environmental and labour law and gives sufficient weight to international human rights obligations and the accountability of corporate investors to respect human rights;

Amendment 38 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 g (new)

5g. Regrets that Amicus Curiae can not be considered an effective participation since investment tribunals have full discretion to determine whether they accept amicus curiae and this possibility is often rejected or limited by the courts;

Amendment 39 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 h (new)

5h. Calls for a binding and enforceable clause in the IPA for States to protect human rights including by regulating and controlling enterprises and a mandatory clause recalling that businesses have to comply with international human rights and environmental standards;

Amendment 4 #

Manu PINEDA, Marisa MATIAS, Miguel URBÁN CRESPO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that between 1962 and 1971, the US army sprayed some 80 million litres of Agent Orange over the forests and crops in South Vietnam in an effort to deprive the local population of food and prevent progress by the national liberation movement and guerrillas; points out that the agent has infiltrated subterranean waters and rivers, causing serious physical and mental disadvantages for some 3 million Vietnamese people; points out that 1 million Vietnamese people are still suffering serious consequences, including the 150 000 people born with birth defects;

Amendment 40 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 i (new)

5i. Calls the EU and Viet Nam to cooperate to develop an action plan to fight child labour, including the necessary due diligence framework for enterprises;

Amendment 41 #

Raphaël GLUCKSMANN, Maria NOICHL, Maria ARENA, Bettina VOLLATH, Isabel SANTOS, Andrea COZZOLINO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 j (new)

5j. Calls therefore the EP to give its consent to the agreements only when these recommendations, are legally and effectively protected;

Amendment 5 #

Martin HORWOOD, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Ilhan KYUCHYUK, Irina VON WIESE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Deplores that the European Commission did not carry out a human rights impact assessment on the EU- Vietnam IPA, which contradicts the spirit of the decision of the EU Ombudsman of 2015 as well as the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy; calls on the European Commission to carry out a human rights impact assessment before the ratification of the IPA takes place;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the enhanced political dialogue between the EU and Viet Nam and the upgraded potential to address human rights concerns in the framework of the institutional mechanisms established under Article 35 of the PCA and Article 13 of the FTA; ~~believ~~reiterates that those articles alone will not provide the necessary tools to address human rights concerns related to the ~~IPA~~implementation of the IPA, and should as such be followed by stringent scrutiny by the EU and its Members States, in the form of an independent monitoring and complaint mechanism with the main purpose of continuously assessing human rights impacts;

Amendment 7 #