"Offshore Tribunals: Where Foreign Corporations Hold Sway Over British Democracy"
A peculiar aspect of the UK's political landscape has emerged, one that may undermine the very fabric of democracy. In recent years, foreign corporations and oligarchs have been able to sue the government directly in secret offshore tribunals, bypassing traditional courts and parliamentary oversight. The stakes are high, with billions of pounds at play.
Under this arrangement known as "investor-state dispute settlement" (ISDS), multinational corporations can challenge laws and policies deemed detrimental to their interests. These tribunals, comprised of corporate lawyers with no connection to the British public, render verdicts that have significant implications for domestic policy. Unlike conventional courts, ISDS tribunals offer little to no appeal mechanism or judicial review.
The potential consequences are staggering. In one notable case, a company representing Mikhail Fridman, a Russian oligarch, is seeking $16 billion in damages from the UK government over sanctions imposed after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Cherie Blair, wife of the former British Prime Minister, is among those advising him on the matter.
The implications extend beyond individual cases to have far-reaching effects on national sovereignty and climate policy. Fossil fuel companies, for example, have been using ISDS tribunals to challenge government attempts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, many countries, including France, Denmark, and New Zealand, have curtailed their climate ambitions out of fear of facing costly lawsuits.
This phenomenon has been quietly building over the years, with fossil fuel companies securing billions of dollars in payouts through ISDS tribunals. The sheer scale of these payments β equivalent to the combined GDP of 45 small economies β has sparked concerns that climate finance is being used to prop up polluters rather than support climate mitigation efforts.
The UK government's approach to this issue is puzzling, given the overwhelming evidence that ISDS agreements are unlikely to boost foreign investment and may even discourage it. Despite widespread criticism and public opposition, Keir Starmer's government appears unwilling to rethink its stance on these treaties.
As George Monbiot astutely observed, "We have twice beaten attempts to extend ISDS... Now we will need to mobilise again: this time against our own government, which seems to care more for foreign corporations than it does for us." It is imperative that the British public becomes aware of this developing crisis and demands greater transparency and accountability from their elected representatives.
A peculiar aspect of the UK's political landscape has emerged, one that may undermine the very fabric of democracy. In recent years, foreign corporations and oligarchs have been able to sue the government directly in secret offshore tribunals, bypassing traditional courts and parliamentary oversight. The stakes are high, with billions of pounds at play.
Under this arrangement known as "investor-state dispute settlement" (ISDS), multinational corporations can challenge laws and policies deemed detrimental to their interests. These tribunals, comprised of corporate lawyers with no connection to the British public, render verdicts that have significant implications for domestic policy. Unlike conventional courts, ISDS tribunals offer little to no appeal mechanism or judicial review.
The potential consequences are staggering. In one notable case, a company representing Mikhail Fridman, a Russian oligarch, is seeking $16 billion in damages from the UK government over sanctions imposed after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Cherie Blair, wife of the former British Prime Minister, is among those advising him on the matter.
The implications extend beyond individual cases to have far-reaching effects on national sovereignty and climate policy. Fossil fuel companies, for example, have been using ISDS tribunals to challenge government attempts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, many countries, including France, Denmark, and New Zealand, have curtailed their climate ambitions out of fear of facing costly lawsuits.
This phenomenon has been quietly building over the years, with fossil fuel companies securing billions of dollars in payouts through ISDS tribunals. The sheer scale of these payments β equivalent to the combined GDP of 45 small economies β has sparked concerns that climate finance is being used to prop up polluters rather than support climate mitigation efforts.
The UK government's approach to this issue is puzzling, given the overwhelming evidence that ISDS agreements are unlikely to boost foreign investment and may even discourage it. Despite widespread criticism and public opposition, Keir Starmer's government appears unwilling to rethink its stance on these treaties.
As George Monbiot astutely observed, "We have twice beaten attempts to extend ISDS... Now we will need to mobilise again: this time against our own government, which seems to care more for foreign corporations than it does for us." It is imperative that the British public becomes aware of this developing crisis and demands greater transparency and accountability from their elected representatives.