Download - FDCL

More documents

Recommendations

Info

48 allowed by law to give preferential treatment to local suppliers and producers (“local content”). A country which has signed the agreement can, according to the Mode 3 of GATS (“commercial presence”, cross-border supply of services), no longer make any so-called “performance requirements” of foreign investors (like, e.g., the minimum percentage requirement for employing the local workforce or for technology transfers). Even environmental and social regulations of each member state run the risk of infringing upon the NT principle. In contrast to the GATT treaty, which was a so-called “top-down” agreement (i.e., the rules apply automatically to all member states unless a country has explicitly negotiated exceptions for some sectors in the form of so-called negative lists), the GATS is a so-called “bottom-up” agreement (the rules apply if they appear in the so-called “list of commitments” of the respective country). It is in particular this “bottom-up”mechanism, which the WTO commonly quotes as an argument for the democratic legitimacy of GATS: Democratically elected governments would in the end decide which sectors in their country would be assigned to GATS and which would remain under national sovereignty, i.e., “in the exercise of governmental authority.” 99 The problem in this case is the unclear definition of “in the exercise of governmental authority” and secondly, the fact that everytime a (domestic or foreign) private supplier competes with public services, the set of regulations under GATS can be applied and with it the possibility of a legal complaint before the WTO arbitration court. Considering the rules under GATS, the danger exists, for example, in the case of education, that a private school, which is mainly owned by a foreign investor, could take legal action against the “market-distorting subsidies” of a neighboring public school, even if the educational sector was explicitly excluded in the form of a negative sector list: Even if the sovereignty clause within the GATS applies: “Article I(3) of the GATS excludes “services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority”. These are services that are supplied neither on a commercial basis nor in competition with other suppliers. Cases in point are social security schemes and any other public service, such as health or education, that is provided at non-market conditions.” 100 The formulation “neither on a commercial basis nor in competition with other suppliers” 101 is quite dubious. If a private school, mainly owned by a foreign investor, 99 http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats_01_e.htm. 100 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/gatsqa_e.htm. 101 See: Hartmann, Eva / Scherrer, Christoph: Negotiations on Trade in Services – The Positions of the Trade Unions on GATS, in: Friedrich-Ebert Foundation, Occasional Papers No. 6, Geneva, May 2003, p. 12.
which works on a profit-basis, sees itself in competition with a public (non-profit) school, this private school would theoretically be able to take legal action against the public school, i.e., against the educational system as a public good in general. In the end – as no state will be able to abolish all subsidies for public schooling - this might lead to the situation of private schools obtaining the same right to state-subsidies as public ones. 102 This would mean submitting public services to commercial interests through the GATS - which would have enormous consequences for social, cultural and human rights. 102 Ellen Gould: A Posição do Brasil nas Negociações do GATS (Acordo Geral sobre Comércio de Serviços), p. 2. 49
Page 2 and 3: Christian Russau Enforcement of int
Page 4 and 5: Preface Since the end of 1999 the C
Page 6 and 7: If the “Interregional Association
Page 8 and 9: 8 Chapter 5: The enforcement of int
Page 10 and 11: 10 1.1 Negotiations of the “Inter
Page 12 and 13: 12 A similar agreement of the so-ca
Page 14 and 15: 14 tute in the eyes of many countri
Page 16 and 17: 16 amaraty, where the FTAA-negotiat
Page 18 and 19: 18 free trade agreement between the
Page 20 and 21: 20 at the UN Millenium Summit to ha
Page 22 and 23: 22 on the possibility of a unilater
Page 24 and 25: 24 tual contradictions between the
Page 26 and 27: 26 fired. The workers union OGB-L,
Page 28 and 29: 28 policy and EU development policy
Page 31 and 32: Chapter 2: Foreign direct investmen
Page 33 and 34: 50% in 2002 as compared to the prev
Page 35 and 36: The reasons for propagating this co
Page 37 and 38: • according to a study conducted
Page 39 and 40: promotion of domestic demand, in or
Page 41 and 42: 2.2 International Agreements and Tr
Page 43 and 44: 2.3 The World Trade Organization WT
Page 45 and 46: • trade and investment • compet
Page 47: 2.3.3 The GATS agreement The Genera
Page 51 and 52: “deadline: by 1 January 2005”.
Page 53 and 54: “discrimination” or “expropri
Page 55: Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC)
Page 58 and 59: 58 3.1 European foreign investment
Page 60 and 61: 60 zations and liberalization in La
Page 62 and 63: 62 the profitability, on the electr
Page 64 and 65: 64 America. Also the issue of human
Page 66 and 67: 66 • Thirdly the WTO Dispute Sett
Page 68 and 69: 68 to the U.S. trade power by rapid
Page 70 and 71: 70 The largest trade balance defici
Page 72 and 73: 72 OECD area by European companies.
Page 74 and 75: 74 EDF, has issued a similar compla
Page 76 and 77: 76 European automobile producers in
Page 78 and 79: 78 But not only international law o
Page 80 and 81: 80 ment,” which in the beginning
Page 82 and 83: 82 4. 1 The free trade agreement be
Page 84 and 85: 84 issues for us.” 233 On the oth
Page 86 and 87: 86 capital flows” explicitly. The
Page 88 and 89: 88 which also speaks out against th
Page 90 and 91: 90 in Congress and encouraged the B
Page 92 and 93: 92 studies in 2003 on the impact of
Page 94 and 95: 94 The MEBF successfully works as a
Page 96 and 97: 96 “We have tried to explain how
Page 98 and 99:
98 4.2 The example of Brazil: Forei
Page 100 and 101:
100 Brazilian Constitution. This wo
Page 102 and 103:
102 countries through CC-5 accounts
Page 104 and 105:
104 4.3 Brazil, foreign direct inve
Page 106 and 107:
106 “Commercial Presence: The jur
Page 108 and 109:
108 Providing cheaper access to wat
Page 110 and 111:
110
Page 112 and 113:
112 5.1 Foreign direct investment i
Page 114 and 115:
114 The agreement on government pro
Page 116 and 117:
116 5.2 The case of Chile: Foreign
Page 118 and 119:
118 which was believed to be dead,
Page 120 and 121:
120 c) The still pending Doha “De
Page 122 and 123:
122 gesamtamerikanischen Freihandel
Page 124 and 125:
124 · http://europa.eu.int/comm/co
Page 126 and 127:
126 · http://www.citizen.org/ · h
Page 128 and 129:
128 · http://www.rebrip.org.br ·
Page 130 and 131:
130 um den Markt der wiederentdeckt
Page 132 and 133:
132 · Torrent, Ramón: Acordos Int
Page 134 and 135:
134 DIHK Deutscher Industrie- und H
Page 136 and 137:
136 Lomé Lomé-Agreement between E
Page 138 and 139:
About FDCL is a nonprofitorganizati
show all

Download - FDCL

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?