20 Amendments of Yannick JADOT related to 2018/0095M(NLE)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to the pending Opinion of the Court of Justice of the European Union in procedure 1/17 on the compatibility of the Investment Court System provided for in the EU Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) requested by the Government of Belgium on 6 September 2017
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU and Singapore share the samesome important fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights, cultural and linguistic diversity and a strong commitment to the multilateral trading system while diverging in the fundamental value of press and political freedoms and civil liberties;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Singapore is one of the most important global centres for financial and insurance services, the eighth largest destination for EU foreign direct investment and the first in the ASEAN region; whereas many European financial companies have equity stakes in companies under Singaporean law which would be enabled to challenge EU existing or future regulations regarded as curtailing their profits through the Investment Court System;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the agreement is based on a wide definition of what constitutes a covered investment, including portfolio investments, bonds, goodwill and IPR;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas all investments covered in the Financial Services chapter of the Free Trade Agreement with Singapore will be covered by the agreement, including investment and profit expectation in highly speculative areas, such as futures, derivatives and transferable securities;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
I a. whereas it is arguable whether investment protection helps attract Foreign Direct Investment or is a determining factor for investors when making investment decisions;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the Parties committed to pursuing a multilateral investment court, an initiative strongly supported by Parliament;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the growing public rejection of special courts for foreign investors which have enabled transnational corporations to wield undue power over public policy-making; notes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replacformed the highly controversial investor- to- state dispute settlement (ISDS) regarding some of its procedural short-comings; underlines that these reforms do not extend to the substantive provisions in the new ICS mechanism, which are at the centre of public rejection;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the Singapore investment protection agreement will ensurperpetuate a high level of investment protection while safeguardingithout corresponding investor obligations, on the base of substantive investor rights which systemically weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that Singapore is a global financial centre; is therefore alarmed by the fact that the Financial Services chapter of the Free Trade Agreement with Singapore will be fully covered by the investment protection agreement, including investment and profit expectation in highly speculative areas, such as futures, derivatives and transferable securities, and in any kind of new financial products;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Warns that equity participations held by European companies in Singapore could provide the possibility for EU companies to challenge pending new EU legislation regarding prudential financial service regulations, such as on Single Parent Undertakings or on central counterparties for derivatives in third countries' liabilities;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that theUnderlines that Singapore is ranked 13th for the rule of law and 2nd for regulatory enforcement globally, making it the top Asian nation out of 113 countries in the 2017-2018 Rule of Law Index compiled by the World Justice Project (WJP); stresses that therefore no need arises for a special agreement guaranteesing that EU investors in Singapore will not be discriminated vis-à- vis Singaporean investors and properly protectsing them from illegitimate expropriation; reminds that Singapore has never been the responding state in an investor dispute under ICSID, UNCITRAL or the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regards the ratification of the agreement as ill-timed in view of the pending Opinion of the CJEU on Belgium’s request of 6 September 2017 on the compatibility of CETA’s ICS provisions with the EU Treaties; calls on the Council to suspend the ratification procedure until the CJEU has delivered its Opinion in Summer 2019;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the ICS envisages the establishment of a Permanent Investment Tribunal of First Instance and an Appellate Tribunal, whose members will have to possess comparable qualifications to those held by judges of the International Court of Justice, including expertise in public international law and not just commercial law, and will have to satisfy strict rules of independence, integrity and ethical behaviour through a binding code of conduct designed to prevent conflicts of interests; underlines that ICS fails to reform the most contentious substantive provisions of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of “indirect expropriation” and of “fair and equitable treatment”;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals, which will help to instil public trust in the system;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations have no legal standing in front of the tribunal but can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to theRemains entirely unconvinced about the need for the agreement in light of the EU’s strive to establish a multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; consirecalls that the establishment of the ICS unders the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that endis immediately and permanently cost- effective;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; considers that this constitutes an important step in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15