Is investor-to-state dispute settlement compatible with the EU treaties?

The European Parliament is working on a resolution on the proposed trade agreement with the US. The committee on International Trade prepares this resolution. Before that, other committees, like the Legal Affairs committee, can formulate opinions, which the trade committee may take into account. The process will end with a plenary vote.

For background see: Do Opinions 1/09 and 2/13 Spell the Death of ISDS in the EU?

---------

TTIP: compatibility of ISDS with the Treaties

Dear Members of the Legal Affairs committee,

Has regard to CJEU Opinions 1/09 and 2/13;

Recalls that the CJEU has exclusive jurisdiction over the definitive interpretation of European Union law; considers that investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals do not only interpret and apply provisions of the international investment agreements concerned, but frequently interpret local laws; emphasises that the drafts for CETA and EUSFTA, and the ISDS consultation reference text, do not foreclose ISDS tribunals to interpret and apply EU fundamental rights and (general principles of) EU law;

Considers that the CJEU has not yet had the opportunity to define the extent to which its jurisdiction is limited in common foreign and security policy matters (Opinion 2/13, paragraph 251); emphasises that present ISDS plans do not foreclose ISDS tribunals gain competence on issues the CJEU is not competent on (compare CJEU Opinion 2/13 paragraph 254);

Insists that the Commission ascertain that adjudicative systems in trade agreements are compatible with the Treaties;

Insists that the proposed TTIP safeguard the EU’s policy space regarding intellectual property rights.