• AgoraVox sur Twitter
  • RSS
  • Agoravox TV
  • Agoravox Mobile


Commentaire de Xenozoid

sur « Revenants » de Daech : le syndrome de Stockholm ?


Voir l'intégralité des commentaires de cet article

Xenozoid 27 janvier 2018 16:36

@Ouam

j’attends mieu de toi sur ce coup la..

my liege really i did not get it,tout cela pour dire que les outils existent ,ils sont disont tres diffus a défault d’être confus,BTW

les pays très bas sont aussi une plaque tournante, pour les proces isds, la hollande ayant le plus de traites commerciaux internationaux avec d’autre pays (85), si tu ne sais pas ce qu’est 

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)

The multinational corporations only need to convince the lawyers that a law protecting public health or the environment violates their special “trade” agreement rights. The corporate lawyers’ decisions are not subject to appeal. And if a country does not pay, the corporation can seize a government’s assets — bank accounts, ships, airplanes — to extract the compensation ordered.

Not only do corporations get a special system of “justice” outside our courts, but it’s totally rigged in their favor.

One day a corporate lawyer can sit on an ISDS tribunal deciding cases and the next day they can attack our laws on behalf of a corporation. And, the lawyers deciding cases also get to decide who pays their large hourly fees. That means even when government’s “win” they often have to pay millions in legal costs.

ISDS also incentivizes the outsourcing of jobs by providing special privileges and rights for firms that relocate abroad. The special treatment for foreign investors that the ISDS system allows eliminates many of the costs and risks that make firms think twice about moving to countries with weaker labor and environmental standards — creating a global race to the bottom.

question du règlement des différends entre investisseurs et États

Répondre Signaler un abus

Voir ce commentaire dans son contexte


Derniers commentaires




Palmarès