Dispute settlement panels

3.11.2014

Question for written answer E-008663-14
to the Commission
Rule 130
Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL)

When presenting the new Commission to the European Parliament, President Juncker mentioned the creation of investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms within the framework of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Although he said that the jurisdiction of European courts would not be restricted by ISDS, he also did not altogether reject ISDS, saying that his support depended on prior agreement with Commissioner Timmermans. On the other hand, he made no comment on the continued inclusion of ISDS in other agreements, such as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).

These ambiguities and omissions are hard to justify, given that European civil society is strongly opposed to intervention by multinationals in popular sovereignty.

1. Does the Commission see the ISDS included in CETA as a possible model for the negotiation of TTIP?2. If not, what legal safeguards are provided in CETA to justify the continued inclusion of ISDS in the treaty, differentiating it from the TTIP negotiations?3. What forms of dispute settlement tribunals would be compatible with the political guidelines established by the new Commission for its negotiations on TTIP?