BREAKING: WikiLeaks Releases Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - Investment Chapter

[Hissyspit]

Source: WikiLeaks Press Release

@wikileaks: RELEASE: Secret draft for the Trans-Pacific Partnership - Investment Chapter https://t.co/GkBXbq8hTI/s/CmD9 #TPP #TTIP http://t.co/Ose0kwwdLH/s/NlgH

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - Investment chapter

WikiLeaks releases today the "Investment Chapter" from the secret negotiations of the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) agreement. The document adds to the previous WikiLeaks publications of the chapters for Intellectual Property Rights (November 2013) and the Environment (January 2014).

The TPP Investment Chapter, published today, is dated 20 January 2015. The document is classified and supposed to be kept secret for four years after the entry into force of the TPP agreement or, if no agreement is reached, for four years from the close of the negotiations.

The TPP has developed in secret an unaccountable supranational court for multinationals to sue states. This system is a challenge to parliamentary and judicial sovereignty. Similar tribunals have already been shown to chill the adoption of sane environmental protection, public health and public transport policies.

Current TPP negotiation member states are the United States, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, New Zealand and Brunei. The TPP is the largest economic treaty in history, including countries that represent more than 40 per cent of the world´s GDP.

The Investment Chapter highlights the intent of the TPP negotiating parties, led by the United States, to increase the power of global corporations by creating a supra-national court, or tribunal, where foreign firms can "sue" states and obtain taxpayer compensation for "expected future profits". These investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals are designed to overrule the national court systems. ISDS tribunals introduce a mechanism by which multinational corporations can force governments to pay compensation if the tribunal states that a country's laws or policies affect the company's claimed future profits. In return, states hope that multinationals will invest more. Similar mechanisms have already been used. For example, US tobacco company Phillip Morris used one such tribunal to sue Australia (June 2011 – ongoing) for mandating plain packaging of tobacco products on public health grounds; and by the oil giant Chevron against Ecuador in an attempt to evade a multi-billion-dollar compensation ruling for polluting the environment. The threat of future lawsuits chilled environmental and other legislation in Canada after it was sued by pesticide companies in 2008/9. ISDS tribunals are often held in secret, have no appeal mechanism, do not subordinate themselves to human rights laws or the public interest, and have few means by which other affected parties can make representations.

The TPP negotiations have been ongoing in secrecy for five years and are now in their final stages. In the United States the Obama administration plans to "fast-track" the treaty through Congress without the ability of elected officials to discuss or vote on individual measures. This has met growing opposition as a result of increased public scrutiny following WikiLeaks' earlier releases of documents from the negotiations.

The TPP is set to be the forerunner to an equally secret agreement between the US and EU, the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership).

Negotiations for the TTIP were initiated by the Obama administration in January 2013. Combined, the TPP and TTIP will cover more than 60 per cent of global GDP. The third treaty of the same kind, also negotiated in secrecy is TISA, on trade in services, including the financial and health sectors. It covers 50 countries, including the US and all EU countries. WikiLeaks released the secret draft text of the TISA's financial annex in June 2014.

All these agreements on so-called “free trade” are negotiated outside the World Trade Organization's (WTO) framework. Conspicuously absent from the countries involved in these agreements are the BRICs countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China.

Read more: https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment/press.html

---

@wikileaks: RELEASE: Analysis of Trans-Pacific Partnership Investment Chapter https://t.co/CiDjAT7ZfG/s/2hXl

FR: Lori Wallach and Ben Beachy, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch

DT: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 RE: Analysis of Leaked Trans-Pacific Partnership Investment Text

After more than five years of negotiations under conditions of extreme secrecy, on March 25, 2015, a leaked copy of the investment chapter for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was posted. Public Citizen has verified that the text is authentic. Trade officials from the United States and 11 Pacific Rim nations – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam – are in intensive, closed-door negotiations to finish the TPP in the next few months.

The leaked text provides stark warnings about the dangers of “trade” negotiations occurring without press, public or policymaker oversight. It reveals that TPP negotiators already have agreed to many radical terms that would give foreign investors expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to domestic firms under domestic law.

The leaked text would empower foreign firms to directly “sue” signatory governments in extrajudicial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals over domestic policies that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms that foreign firms claim violate their new substantive investor rights. There they could demand taxpayer compensation for domestic financial, health, environmental, land use and other policies and government actions they claim undermine TPP foreign investor privileges, such as the “right” to a regulatory framework that conforms to their “expectations.”

The leaked text reveals the TPP would expand the parallel ISDS legal system by elevating tens of thousands of foreign-owned firms to the same status as sovereign governments, empowering them to privately enforce a public treaty by skirting domestic courts and laws to directly challenge TPP governments in foreign tribunals. Existing ISDS-enforced agreements of the United States, and of other developed TPP countries, have

[Cryptoad]

1. I'll wait for the final release ,,,,,,, thank you.

[n2doc]

6. "The document is classified and supposed to be kept secret for four years after the entry into force

I guess just in time for Ted Cruz's second term….

[Cryptoad]

21. So I suppose I could write and publish Chapter Three

and nobody would know teh difference but me and you and Rafael ...... I have found WiKiLeaks peddles as much BS as the Gubermint! just saying......

[Cleita]

7. Don't hold your breath.

Transparency is the enemy of these agreements.

[sulphurdunn]

12. You may have to wait awhile.

"The TPP Investment Chapter, published today, is dated 20 January 2015. The document is classified and supposed to be kept secret for four years after the entry into force of the TPP agreement or, if no agreement is reached, for four years from the close of the negotiations."

If that means what I think it means, and it's true, you and me will be pretty much screwed long before you get a change read anything that hasn't been leaked.

[psychopomp]

26. Don't sleep on this power grab by transnational corporations

TPP promises to open Japan up more to the rest of the world, so part of me wishes that a new trade agreement that breaks down tariff barriers can be realized.

However, this is clearly going make state citizens beholden to corporate interests in a way heretofore unseen. Everyone whose state signs on to this will have new masters.

[RufusTFirefly]

27. Wow! Two minutes after the OP. Impressive! n/t

[mindwalker_i]

28. "I'm going to wait until that Redwood is firmly inserted

... all the way up my ass before I complain."

[rhett o rick]

31. So you think this is a lie? You trust Obama, who hasn't said shite about this, over all

those that say this is dangerous? That's real FAITH.

[BeanMusical]

41. Lol!

What a stupid thing to say.

[Cryptoad]

42. No need for a personal attack just cause you dont agree........

[BeanMusical]

43. It have nothing to do with disagrement.

"I'll wait for the final release..."

It will be available to be read by the plebeians that we are 4 years after it is enacted. Gee.

[Ichingcarpenter]

54. I'll wait for the final release ,,,,,,, thank you.

[99th_Monkey]

2. This is an awesome development! Great work Julian, Thank you. -nt-

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. Thank goodness for WikiLeaks.

Without this detailed explanation, we would be completely in the dark about what might be forced upon us.

K&R

[villager]

8. so much for all those "transparency" promises, eh?

Alas.

[blkmusclmachine]

40. If they weren't doing something horribly wrong, they'd never have had to go to such lengths to keep

it hidden from public view.

All of this says A LOT about the Prez, and NONE of it is good...

[BainsBane]

5. NAFTA has the same sort of court

a board that hears cases from businesses about trade infractions by member countries. It's not accountable to the high courts in any of the member states. People shouldn't need Wikileaks to tell them this was likely to be in TPP as well. The article mentions a couple of cases that board has rule on without attributing them to NAFTA. Ecuador is not in NAFTA, and I thought that case was adjudicated in the courts of Ecuador and the US, so I'm not sure what mechanism they are talking about in that particular case.

[peacebird]

9. And look how wonderful NAFTA has been for workers in the USA... NOT!

[BainsBane]

13. I certainly don't support it

I didn't at the time, and I don't now. However, the article's repeated claim that the arbitration board would be kept secret for four years doesn't make much sense in light of that experience and the fact that companies need to know about it to file a grievance. I also don't know why the authors of the piece don't identify the disputes involving US, Mexican, and Canadian companies and states as a result of NAFTA. They also appear to conflate law suits in Ecuadorian and US Courts with the trade arbitration boards. If the public is to understand what's at stake in TPP, they should know how it has worked in NAFTA.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

14. It wasn't beneficial for Mexican workers either.

[Hoyt]

47. If not, why hasn't Mexico withdrawn, and is part of TPP negotiations.

I guess the auto plants going to Mexico don't help their people.

I've seen very few people here who care about foreign countries getting better jobs.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

61. The auto plants were already there

It's all about those with the gold making the rules, all that hype about good Mexican jobs, was mostly that, as the cheap labor market shifted to China.

[Hoyt]

62. Wrong. Audi just announced it is opening a big plant there, primarily because

Mexico holds better trade agreements than the USA. It was posted here in the last few days.

[Scuba]

10. This has Hillary's fingerprints all over it.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/10/11/americas-pacific-century/

[msongs]

23. the obama doctrine, created by obama, for his corporate toadies, in secret. hillary? nice try nt

[BeanMusical]

44. Yes it does.

[LiberalEsto]

11. The TPP is f*cking insanity

Bless Wikileaks

[blackspade]

15. Cue up the Authoritarians.....

[RufusTFirefly]

25. Don't look now, but they're already here.

Boggles the mind how anyone could come to the defense of such an undemocratic abomination.
And yet some do.

[rhett o rick]

32. One has to understand FAITH. nm

[BeanMusical]

45. Kool-Aid overdose?

[Jack Rabbit]

16. Thank you, Mr. Assange

for your efforts on behalf of humanity in opposition to artificial persons.

[pa28]

17. Wikileaks does it again. Thank you! n/t

[mother earth]

18. Well, it's the next step for corporations, right? To have powers extending beyond that of nations,

so somebody tell me how we can continue to cheerlead for either side?

Clearly our "candidates" are serving the oligarchy, which has nothing to do with the republic or democracy.

They don't even care that they are selling out human rights. They are part of what at some point, we should realize is the ultimate betrayal involving only sheer, outright greed.

K & R & TY for Assange & you, Hissyspit.

[blkmusclmachine]

38. Our "DEMS" are 100% sold out to the 1%

[mother earth]

60. Indeed, they are. This is the very sorry state of the union, our gov't itself has been bought and

no longer represents the people.

(Edited to add, there are but a few lone voices in our party that cannot win anything for the masses without a return to rule of law and accountability, starting first with campaign finance reform & a reversal of corporate personhood by our highest court.)

[OKNancy]

19. New York TImes article

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/business/trans-pacific-partnership-seen-as-door-for-foreign-suits-against-us.html?smid=tw-share

The chapter in the draft of the trade deal, dated Jan. 20, 2015, and obtained by The New York Times in collaboration with the group WikiLeaks, is certain to kindle opposition from both the political left and the right. The sensitivity of the issue is reflected in the fact that the cover mandates that the chapter not be declassified until four years after the Trans-Pacific Partnership comes into force or trade negotiations end, should the agreement fail.

[Dragonfli]

20. President Obama really supports this?

Why on earth would anybody want to give foreign corporations sovereignty over our country and it's environmental and labor laws?

How is this rationalized as a good thing for us? (or any other target nation for that matter)

[davidn3600]

34. Money for the few at the expense of the many. That's all that matters now.

[Enthusiast]

56. That's what I don't understand.

Why would anyone be a fan of Fascism?

[Telcontar]

63. Came with cool uniforms?

Gotta love the tight, black leather outfits.

[AzDar]

22. Bravo! Now this abomination needs to be KILLED!

[Dont call me Shirley]

24. Call your Senators, Representatives and Whitehouse to express your opposition to this global

corporate coup' d'états.

Whitehouse Comments: 202-456-1111

United States Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121

[mahina]

30. Without a call or letter or both, the rest is just hot air

Thank you for getting us to the point. Every day!

[Dont call me Shirley]

57. You just warmed my heart. Thank you, mahina.

[Hoyt]

29. The same tribunals are in NAFTA and are used by European Union nations. Who writes this BS?

Philip Morris has been trying to stop Australia's tobacco packaging law for 4 years. They still haven't been successful.

[rhett o rick]

33. I would love to see documentation showing how these trade agreements have helped

the 99%.

[Cleita]

35. You can't see what doesn't exist. eom

[Hoyt]

46. Ask Robert Reich.. He still feels NAFTA was good, but didn't go far enough

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2015, 01:11 AM - Edit history (1)

with worker rights and environmental issues -- exactly what Obama is trying to correct with TPP.

[rhett o rick]

51. I haven't seen any documentation that shows that NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO, have done anything

to help American workers. And let's be honest, the American workers are hurting so obviously nothing has done much good.

"exactly what Obama is trying to correct with TPP" And you know that how? Because he told you? Why doesn't he want to tell us what's in the agreement? We've seen parts of the document leaked and some Congressional representatives have seen parts and NO ONE has said that it will help the 99%. You are going completely on FAITH.

[Hoyt]

53. American workers might be hurting worse if we do nothing. Fact is, world is changing.

Actually Obama has told us, you just don't care to listen or trust him.

To repeat what I have posted before, I'm still convinced Obama will not endorse a final agreement that sells us down the river. I know there are plenty who thought he'd gut Social Security, push the pipeline, work against net neutrality, etc., but he hasn't.

And I believe Obama when he responded to Matt Yglesias a few weeks ago by saying: "Where Americans have a legitimate reason to be concerned is that in part this rise has taken place on the backs of an international system in which China wasn't carrying its own weight or following the rules of the road and we were, and in some cases we got the short end of the stick. This is part of the debate that we're having right now in terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal that, you know, we've been negotiating. There are a lot of people who look at the last 20 years and say, 'Why would we want another trade deal that hasn't been good for American workers? It allowed outsourcing of American companies locating jobs in low-wage China and then selling it back to Walmart. And, yes, we got cheaper sneakers, but we also lost all our jobs.'"

"And my argument is two-fold. Number one: precisely because that horse is out of the barn, the issue we're trying to deal with right now is, can we make for a higher bar on labor, on environmental standards, et cetera, in that region and write a set of rules where it's fairer, because right now it's not fair, and if you want to improve it, that means we need a new trading regime. We can't just rely on the old one because the old one isn't working for us."

"But the second reason it's important is because the countries we're negotiating with are the same countries that China is trying to negotiate with. And if we don't write the rules out there, China's going to write the rules. And the geopolitical implications of China writing the rules for trade or maritime law or any kind of commercial activity almost inevitably means that we will be cut out or we will be deeply disadvantaged. Our businesses will be disadvantaged, our workers will be disadvantaged. So when I hear, when I talk to labor organizations, I say, right now, we've been hugely disadvantaged. Why would we want to maintain the status quo? If we can organize a new trade deal in which a country like Vietnam for the first time recognizes labor rights and those are enforceable, that's a big deal. It doesn't mean that we're still not going to see wage differentials between us and them, but they're already selling here for the most part. And what we have the opportunity to do is to set long-term trends that keep us in the game in a place that we've got to be. . . . . . ."

http://www.vox.com/a/barack-obama-interview-vox-conversation/obama-foreign-policy-transcript

[sendero]

58. If I had a dollar..

.... for every time a politician sold us out while claiming it was for our benefit I could retire.

I see, after watching him elevate into power the bad actors that have wrecked our economy, no reason to trust Obama on this, none at all.

He talks really well. His actions are what matters.

[joshcryer]

55. That's because the tribunals favor governments.

Which is why they exist.

[Overseas]

36. K&R. We had heard this type of Multinational Superpower was in the text.

It is sad to see how strong the language is and hard to imagine how any Democrat could support it.

We heard lots of Job Creation platitudes about NAFTA that proved such a disaster in reality.

I hope this will be roundly defeated.

[WinkyDink]

37. Am I incorrect in thinking this is the very essence of Fascism?

[blkmusclmachine]

39. It is Fascism.

[GliderGuider]

59. Smells like it to me. nt

[closeupready]

48. The provision, as bolded, seems unconstitutionally vague AND ambiguous.

A proper judiciary would throw out such a treaty as unenforceable.

[burrowowl]

49. K&R!!!!!!!!!!!

[BeanMusical]

50. Kick and R.

[grasswire]

52. more discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026415083

[Bill USA]

64. "multinational corporations can force governments to pay compensation ..for claimed FUTURE profits"?

Hard to see how any country would sign up to that. Compensation for "claimed future profits".. sounds like science fiction to me.

[Michigan-Arizona]

65. K&R n/t

[Matilda]

66. Thank you, Wikileaks!

Australia is also a signatory to this, and it could also have an impact on our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), which allows us access to subsidised pharmaceuticals. That will affect every Australian, never mind any other clause of the TPP.

It's terribly wrong that our governments can sign these agreements which will affect every one of us at some time without telling us what is in it. It's very clear that we, the people, will not benefit in any way.

It's a given that Tony Abbott is an idiot, and we shouldn't be surprised at anything he does, but what's Obama's excuse?

[Nihil]

67. The usual:

> what's Obama's excuse?

Politician on the way out wanting to ensure that his "nest egg" is sufficiently supersized ...