7 Amendments of Miguel URBÁN CRESPO related to 2018/0358M(NLE)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Recital A (new)
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 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
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 a (new)
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 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomAcknowledges 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 notcan 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;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 (new)
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 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
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;