Citizens going 'rogue' would not be a valid reason to initiate an ISDS dispute.
Can you point to an ISDS regulation that states that a government cannot violate an NDA?
Please.
Keeping in mind, of course, that the case to which you point is not an ISDS dispute.
The dispute in the article to which you linked is not an ISDS dispute.
The US has not yet lost an ISDS dispute, although it surely will (Keystone XL comes to mind). It nearly lost one, but the Government 'leaned on' one of the arbitrators beforehand.
Why would you want to cure the parasites? Wouldn't you want to kill them?
Surely the objective is to cure the patient who has parasites. Albenza does cure some parasite related infections.
What research should your doctor have done that s/he did not?
Oh, FFS. The article is quite clear. If someone reads the headline and doesn't understand after a few paragraphs what it's all about, that person clearly isn't fit to post here.
Other than by the name of Anonymous Coward.
Oops. Sorry.
"alleged direct expropriations of investments" is a pretty big and vague category.
No it's not. Expropriation is a well understood concept in International Law.
> E.g. the recent tax changes that have been occurring around the world to prevent companies avoiding taxes by offshoring profits could fall under this category.
No they couldn't. Taxation is not expropriation, period.
It should also be concerned about the potential for "regulatory chill" from the clauses that would prevent further liberalisation of Australia's intellectual property and labour laws after it had been ratified.
How did the word 'further' get in there? There hasn't been any liberalisation of Australia's IP or labour laws in recent times, with IP laws in particular being tightened up as a result of AUSFTA (Australia - US Free Trade Agreement).
What this tells me is you have someone in that DA's office who has too much ambition. It seems likely someone wanted to pad their statistics for child porn prosecutions, to help a future bid for public office. This is someone to watch, because this is a person who cares more for personal power than for justice or actually serving the community.
Where did you get 'for the rest of his life' from?
He will be on the register for eight years.
Which is exactly what the ISDS is being used for in a majority of cases.
I'm sorry, please help me here ... which section of the Constitution says that this is OK?
The US is a signatory to the New York Conventions, and has therefore affirmed that it will respect arbitral decisions.
Were it not to do so, there are mechanisms to use domestic courts in other countries to seize US assets.
My country was on the receiving end of an ISDS lawsuit over plain-packaging cigarettes. You can't imagine what it's like to have your country's sovereignty violated by an international company who just wants to exploit you for money.
- Twitter could sue Turkey for full-site blocking
- Ditto for Youtube in Pakistan
- Google could sue China for censorship
- (Irish) Apple could sue the US for forcing encryption backdoors
It's worth mentioning that ISDS lawsuits won't necessarily come from *foreign* investors. The Canadian mining company Lone Star Pine sued the Canadian government for $250 million after the province of Quebec banned fracking. They were able to do so under NAFTA’s ISDS rules, using their Delaware-registered subsidiary.
Two little children throwing school yard insults.
Grow up, both of you, or you won't get cookies and milk after school.
To be pedantic, The Obama administration did not release the TPP text. It was released by New Zealand, the official repository country for the agreement. https://www.tpp.mfat.govt.nz/text
Other countries then published it on their own websites.
I've often read it as "Obama decided to release the text". He didn't. The 12 nations decided.
Re: Re:
The cited article tells you the answer to that question.