Potential for serious harm
ISDSs have been controversial for decades. Companies can request compensation for state actions they claim unfairly affect their finances, including the profits they expected to make. The system allows corporations to challenge – and even change – policies that will hit their bottom line. This can cost nations millions, even billions of pounds, in some disputes – meaning it has the potential to seriously harm a poorer nation.
Previous high-profile cases have challenged states’ corporate tax policies and minimum-wage laws that threatened investors’ profits; government actions to protect the environment and limit contributions to climate change; and industry efforts to redress racial inequalities in post-Apartheid South Africa.
Most international investment treaties and free trade deals allow companies to request compensation for state actions they claim unfairly affect their finances, including the profits they expected to make. Defending these cases, even if states are successful in the end, can take years and cost millions of dollars.
In 2006, for example, Italian granite investors (not represented by Withers) filed a claim against South Africa, two years after its post-Apartheid Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act came into effect. The new laws, which required companies to reapply for mining licenses and mandated a 26% ownership stake in the country’s mining companies by Black South Africans, were intended to redress longstanding inequalities in the mining sector as a result of racial Apartheid.
Comments
We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.