De nuestra consideraci\u00f3n:<\/p>\n
Como ex integrantes de la Comisi\u00f3n para la Auditor\u00eda Integral Ciudadana de los Tratados de Protecci\u00f3n Rec\u00edproca de Inversiones y del Sistema de Arbitraje en Materia de Inversiones (CAITISA), y como miembros de la sociedad civil que apoyan el Tratado Vinculante Sobre Empresas Transnacionales y Derechos Humanos, hemos recibido con mucha preocupaci\u00f3n el anuncio de presentar a 16 pa\u00edses un nuevo modelo de tratado bilateral de protecci\u00f3n de inversiones (TBI).<\/p>\n
La justificaci\u00f3n empleada por voceros de su Gobierno para renegociar estos instrumentos, se ha centrado b\u00e1sicamente en se\u00f1alar que estos tratados ser\u00edan determinantes para atraer inversi\u00f3n extranjera directa, y, que la incompatibilidad de estos con la Constituci\u00f3n de Montecristi, se solucionar\u00eda limitando el sistema de soluci\u00f3n de controversias inversor Estado, a foros regionales o latinoamericanos; argumentos que no han considerado y por lo tanto se contradicen con los resultados de la auditor\u00eda ciudadana, contenida en el informe ejecutivo de CAITISA entregado al pa\u00eds.<\/p>\n
Si bien el nuevo modelo de TBI incluye cambios leves -principalmente con relaci\u00f3n a detalles jur\u00eddicos de los millonarios laudos que enfrent\u00f3 el Ecuador- las empresas transnacionales mantienen derechos exorbitantes y se sigue contemplando al arbitraje internacional como mecanismo de soluci\u00f3n de controversias.<\/p>\n
La auditor\u00eda de CAITISA determin\u00f3 con toda claridad que estos instrumentos no han sido determinantes en el Ecuador para atraer inversi\u00f3n extranjera directa, que aquella inversi\u00f3n que lleg\u00f3 al pa\u00eds lo hizo en sectores de alta rentabilidad, que su aporte en t\u00e9rminos de generaci\u00f3n de empleo y bienes que permitan ampliar las posibilidades de producci\u00f3n del pa\u00eds fue baja, y, que en muchos de los casos dej\u00f3 graves afectaciones sociales y ambientales.<\/p>\n
Del an\u00e1lisis que realiz\u00f3 CAITISA de los TBI suscritos por el pa\u00eds, su proceso de negociaci\u00f3n y denuncia, quedaron en evidencia graves irregularidades en su negociaci\u00f3n y ratificaci\u00f3n, y qued\u00f3 de manifiesto su incompatibilidad con principios transversales de la Constituci\u00f3n como el de igualdad ante la ley y soberan\u00eda, as\u00ed como con el modelo de desarrollo en ella consagrado.<\/p>\n
De igual manera la auditor\u00eda demostr\u00f3 la grave afectaci\u00f3n al patrimonio estatal que implic\u00f3 la implementaci\u00f3n del sistema de arbitraje internacional, que en los casos emblem\u00e1ticos que enfrent\u00f3 el Estado ecuatoriano (Chevron y Occidental), adem\u00e1s dej\u00f3 mucho que desear respecto a su objetividad, juridicidad y transparencia.<\/p>\n
Nos preocupa que se pretenda negociar nuevos TBI con 16 pa\u00edses, incluyendo algunos que (a diferencia de los a\u00f1os 90) han cuestionado la soluci\u00f3n de controversias inversionista-Estado, y, como en el caso de los pa\u00edses europeos, no tienen competencia para negociar por s\u00ed mismos este tipo de tratados y su m\u00e1xima corte de justicia rechaz\u00f3 los arbitrajes inversionista-Estado.<\/p>\n
Lamentamos profundamente que el Pa\u00eds busque negociar nuevos tratados antes de que concluyan los esfuerzos que Ecuador lidera para la aprobaci\u00f3n del Tratado Vinculante Sobre Empresas Transnacionales y Derechos Humanos y que legitime el arbitraje internacional, que ha sido uno de los instrumentos de coacci\u00f3n utilizados contra los gobiernos por la grandes transnacionales, para asegurar su impunidad por los atentados cometidos contra los derechos humanos y el ambiente en el Ecuador y en el mundo. Todo esto en un momento en el que la voz ecuatoriana es esperada con expectativa en el marco de las negociaciones multilaterales para reformar el sistema de arbitraje de inversiones que se lleva a cabo en la Comisi\u00f3n de Naciones Unidas para el Derecho Mercantil Internacional (UNCITRAL).<\/p>\n
Conscientes de la necesidad de atraer capitales for\u00e1neos, luego de un estudio exhaustivo, la auditor\u00eda recomend\u00f3 que, en caso de inversores futuros en alg\u00fan proyecto espec\u00edfico de inter\u00e9s estrat\u00e9gico para el Pa\u00eds, el inversor renuncie a los derechos de soluci\u00f3n de controversias al amparo de los TBI y que, en su remplazo, se suscriban s\u00f3lo a los tribunales ad hoc bajo leyes nacionales, como ya lo ha venido aplicando el Estado ecuatoriano con varios contratos de inversi\u00f3n.<\/p>\n
Convocamos a que su gobierno reconsidere el inicio de negociaciones y que no omita las recomendaciones de la auditor\u00eda ciudadana. Sobre la base de los resultados de CAITISA y los textos del nuevo modelo, estamos prestos para un di\u00e1logo constructivo, en defensa de los derechos humanos, la soberan\u00eda del Ecuador y los intereses de los pueblos.<\/p>\n
Atentamente,<\/p>\n
___<\/p>\n
Dear Mr. President,<\/p>\n
As former members of the Commission for the Citizens\u2019 Integral Audit of Reciprocal Investment Protection Treaties and the Investment Arbitration System (CAITISA), and as members of civil society that support the Binding Treaty on Transnational Corporations and Human Rights, we are deeply concerned with regards to the announcement that the Government of Ecuador will present a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT) to 16 countries.<\/p>\n
Government\u2019s spokespeople have justified the renegotiation of these treaties basically pointing out that these treaties would be the determining factor in attracting foreign direct investment and that the incompatibility of these treaties with the Ecuadorean Constitution would be resolved limiting the investor-state dispute settlement to regional or Latin American fora. These arguments do not consider, and thus contradict, the results of the Citizens\u2019 Audit, included in the executive report published by CAITISA.<\/p>\n
Even though the new model BIT includes small changes \u2013 basically with relation to procedural details Ecuador confronted in its million-dollar awards \u2013 transnational corporations retain exhorbitant rights and international investor-state arbitration is still included as the mechanism through which dispute resolution can take place.<\/p>\n
The CAITISA audit concluded, with due clarity, that these treaties have not been determining in attracting direct foreign investment (FDI) to Ecuador, that such FDI that did arrive did so in high yield sectors, that their contribution to job creation and capital goods was low, and that in many cases it left serious social and environmental impacts.<\/p>\n
CAITISA examined all the BITs signed by Ecuador, their negotiating processes and their termination processes. If found that there were serious irregularities in the negotiation and ratification processes and that there were major incompatibilities with the Constitution\u2019s principles such as equality under law, national sovereignty, and the national development model.<\/p>\n
Likewise, the audit demonstrated the serious negative consequences of international arbitration on the State\u2019s resources, particularly with regards to key cases (Chevron and Occidental). These cases additionally showed the lack of objectivity, due process and transparency of international arbitration.<\/p>\n
We are concerned that new BITs will be negotiated with 16 countries, including some that (unlike in the 1990s) have publicly questioned investor-State dispute settlement, and, in the case of European countries, they do not even have the legal competence to negotiate these treaties individually and its highest court of justice rejected investor-State arbitration.<\/p>\n
We deeply regret that Ecuador start to negotiate new treaties before it concludes the efforts it leads for a Binding Treaty on Transnational Corporations and Human Rights have concluded, and it thus legitimize international arbitration, considering that it has been one of the instruments used by big corporations to blackmail governments to obtain impunity in violations against human rights and the environment, in Ecuador and around the world. While all this occurs, the world awaits Ecuador\u2019s voice with expectation in the framework of the multilateral negotiations to reform the international investment arbitration system, taking place at UNCITRAL.<\/p>\n
After and thorough study, and fully aware of the need to attract foreign capital, in the case of future investors in a specific project of strategic interest for Ecuador, the audit recommended that the investor renounce to any dispute settlement rights under the auspices of any BIT and that, in its replacement, that the investor accept ad hoc tribunals with applicable national law. This practice has already been applied by the Ecuadorean Government in various investment contracts.<\/p>\n
We call upon your government to reconsider the start of negotiations and that it not ignore the recommendations of the Citizens\u2019 Audit. On the basis of the CAITISA results and the new model BIT, we are willing to engage in a constructive dialogue in defense of human rights, Ecuador\u2019s sovereignty and the interests of peoples around the world.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Representantes que formaron parte de la Auditor\u00eda Ciudadana para analizar […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":4828,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_siteseo_robots_primary_cat":"","_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4819","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-tlc"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4819","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4819"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4819\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7256,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4819\/revisions\/7256"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4828"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4819"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4819"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cdes.org.ec\/webantigua\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4819"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}