Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 5kWORD 17k
2 September 2016
E-006659-16
Question for written answer E-006659-16
to the Commission
Rule 130
Anne-Marie Mineur (GUE/NGL)

 Subject:  Abuses in ISDS cases
 Answer in writing 

In an in-depth article on Buzzfeed(1), journalist Chris Hamby explains how ISDS clauses in a number of trade agreements are used to conceal criminal actions by business people. ISDS is in effect used to undermine prison sentences passed on business people by means of a system intended to enable them to lodge complaints against states.

1. Is the Commission aware of the practices described by Chris Hamby?

2. Does the Commission agree that it is highly undesirable for the prosecution of individuals to be a subject of negotiation in arbitration cases and that this ought therefore to be impossible?

3. Can the Commission guarantee that the prosecution of individuals is not permitted to be a subject for negotiation in ISDS/ICS cases based on trade treaties between the EU and third countries?

(1)https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrishamby/super-court

Original language of question: NL 
Legal notice - Privacy policy