abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

6 Oct 2016

Author:
Institute for Policy Studies/Transnational Institute

Brazilian CSOs written contribution

...[T]he Treaty should:  Establish concepts and parameters able to prevent the negotiation of fundamental rights and guarantees...Provide explicitly for the supremacy of the logic of Human Rights...Provide for the possibility of applying the reversion burden of proof practice...Impose direct binding obligations for companies.  Provide that companies can be held accountable for violations that occur in their production chain, especially when it comes to suppliers whose existence depends completely on the main company.  Ensure accountability in case of joint ventures...Make parameters that allow the connection of a company’s performance to a specific State clearer, so that the extension of a State’s liability towards a violation of human rights caused by a company in another country can be determined...Ensure the supremacy of human rights over investor rights, consistent with international human rights treaties and international custom...Reaffirm the right of states and communities to sue companies and investors...Investors should also carry out impact assessments on human rights...Establishing that the States shall ensure ample transparency and public participation in the negotiation of trade and investment agreements.