I just can't get over this. It makes me want to do things I can't express here

[cali]

Peru: Trade Deal Injustice for the Children of La Oroya

<snip>

According to the Blacksmith Institute, a non-profit pollution think tank, the children of La Oroya, Peru live in one of ten most polluted places on earth. In this town of 33,000 high in the central Andes, a metallic smelter has contaminated the air, land, and water for decades.

The La Oroya smelter is owned by Doe Run Peru, which through a complex network of subsidiaries is controlled by the Renco Group. Renco is the holding company of Ira Rennert, one of the wealthiest men in the United States.

<snip>

The children of La Oroya have been given a respite from new emissions, but only because Doe Run has shut down the smelter after claiming financial hardship, in part due to their environmental remediation obligations. [ http://www.citizen.org/documents/renco-memo-03-12.pdf ]The company has repeatedly failed to meet its contractual and legal deadlines to clean up the site, and the Peruvian authorities have demanded clean-up costs within the context of bankruptcy negotations.

In the face of this action, Renco has retaliated, and sued Peru before an international investment tribunal that has been convened under the terms of the U.S.-Peru free trade agreement. Renco is seeking $800 million in damages for the cost of complying with Peru’s environmental and mining laws. The company is also demanding that the international tribunal issue a declaration that Peru, not Renco, is exclusively liable for personal injury claims in a case filed on behalf of children from La Oroya before a Missouri state court in the U.S.

<snip>

http://snddenjpic.org/2012/04/23/peru-trade-deal-injustice-for-the-children-of-la-oroya/

And I can't get over this:

A World Bank arbitration panel ordered Ecuador to pay Occidental Petroleum Corp. (OXY), the largest onshore crude producer in the continental U.S., $1.77 billion to settle a contract dispute.

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, known as ICSID, said Ecuador breached Los Angeles- based Occidental’s contract by failing “to accord fair and equitable treatment,” according to a document on ICSID’s website. Ecuador’s Attorney General Diego Garcia said today the South American country “categorically rejects” the decision and may seek its annulment, according to an e-mailed statement.

Ecuador stripped Occidental of its oil concession in 2006 over an alleged contract breach, prompting the company’s complaint to the panel. In May 2009, Ecuador’s government said it would refuse to comply with the court if it ruled in favor of the company.

<snip>

The settlement is “a nice positive” for Occidental, said Leo Mariani, an analyst for RBC Capital Markets in Austin, Texas. The long-term effects will depend on whether Ecuador adheres to the verdict, Mariani said in an interview. “That’s the problem -- are they really going to honor” the decision?

<snip>

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-05/occidental-awarded-1-77-billion-in-ecuador-contract-dispute-1-.html

Or this:

Metalclad bought a landfill site in Mexico's city of Guadalcázar from a Mexican company Coterin in 1993. Coterin had planned to develop a hazardous waste landfill on the site but were unable to secure the necessary permits from the local government. Metalclad were able to obtain land use permits from the Mexican federal government, but local governments did not respond to their application for a building permit, neither allowing nor denying the site.[1] The mayor of the city was opposed to the landfill because of the amount of toxic waste in it and the threat to the local water supply.

In 1992, before Metalclad purchased the site, a review by Mexican environmental officials found that over twenty thousand tons of hazardous waste had been improperly dumped.[1] The officials agreed to allow the dump to continue processing and to issue permits on the condition that Metalclad clean up the improperly dumped materials.

In 1993, Metalclad purchased the landfill. Locals complained that they were getting sick, developing aggressive diseases, and that their water was polluted.[1] The main water well was about 60 yards from the stream flowing through the location where Metalclad was dumping its material. A 1994 environmental study by commissioned by the new governor found that the dump was appropriately sited (located) and could continue operations.

In 1995, the Mexican Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources authorized the operations of the landfill with the condition that Metalclad agree to clean up the improperly disposed hazardous materials. Local authorities then denied the building permit. A court case determined that the permit denial meant that Metalclad was required to cease operating the site.

In 1997, Metalclad sued the Mexican Government for damages under Chapter 11 of NAFTA for $90 million and was awarded by an ICSID arbitration panel $16.7 million.[2] This award was later reduced by $1.1 million to $15.6 million, by review in the courts of British Columbia (the jurisdiction where the NAFTA hearing was held) due to a recalculation of the applicable interest period.

<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalclad

or this:

Agricultural products conglomerate Cargill Inc. filed a lawsuit in New York federal court Tuesday to force the Mexican government to pay a $94.6 million NAFTA fine over the country's import restrictions on U.S.-produced high fructose corn syrup.

Cargill's lawsuit came just over three years after a Canada-based North American Free Trade Agreement arbitration panel ruled in September 2009 that Mexican trade barriers on corn syrup had violated three provisions of the trilateral treaty. The decision has since been upheld three times by Canada's court system, most recently by the country's Supreme Court in May.

The new lawsuit wants an American court to finally enforce the arbitration ruling, saying Mexico has “failed to pay any of the awarded amount ... despite Cargill's repeated requests.” Interest has ballooned the original $77 million award to $94.6 million, the complaint said.

“Cargill is dedicated to compliance with NAFTA and believes NAFTA is a positive force for trade relations among the U.S., Canada and Mexico,” Cargill spokeswoman Nicole Reichert said Wednesday. “Because Mexico has not yet paid Cargill the award, Cargill has filed this enforcement action in order to preserve our legal rights while we await payment.”

<snip>

http://www.law360.com/articles/393915/cargill-sues-mexico-for-94-6m-nafta-corn-syrup-award

There's more. I won't post it.

This is all going to get that much worse if the TPP and the TTIP are ratified by the Senate.

[djean111]

1. Yeppers. Hillary and Obama are working on gifting us with this sort of thing very soon.

There really can be no possible way to spin this as good just because Obama! Hillary! 80-20! freedom!
And whoever wonders why South America does not like the United States is hopelessly naive.

[Buns_of_Fire]

3. Seriously: What happens when/if these nations just tell the NAFTA/TPP toadies

to go pound sand because they don't intend to pay one red cent of their bogus "fines"?

Sanctions? Frozen assets? Something worse?

[Hydra]

4. Invasions maybe?

I doubt the US would want to do it, but I see this sort of legitimizing Corps as virtual countries as paving the way to using private armies like Blackwater/Xe to go in and forcibly set up operations or just overthrow the gov't in the name of these illegitimate debt rulings.

Scary stuff happening.

[Demo_Chris]

5. The corporations buy the politicians and the people are hosed. nt