http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/News/2016/Advocate-General-opinion-EU-Singapore-deal/
Brussels, 21 December 2016 – In a landmark case that could affect the future of EU trade agreements, the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice has said that national parliaments should have the right to vote on a trade agreement between the EU and Singapore. The case could affect the ratification of other trade agreements, including CETA, a controversial EU-Canada deal. A final ruling is expected in spring 2017.
Greenpeace EU trade policy adviser Shira Stanton said: “We welcome the Advocate General’s opinion and are fairly confident that the Court of Justice will reach the same conclusion in its ruling in 2017. The European Parliament and the Commission should not ignore this opinion, and should wait for the Court’s final decision in 2017 before taking any further decision on CETA. The European Parliament should now ask the Court for its view on CETA’s investment protection mechanism.”
Advocate General Sharpston stressed that her opinion is ‘without prejudice’ to the issue of the compatibility of the Investment Court System with EU law. This means that, while her opinion covers who should decide on different elements of trade deals, it does not imply that elements such as ISDS or the Investment Court System are legal.
Brussels, 21 December 2016 – In a landmark case that could affect the future of EU trade agreements, the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice has said that national parliaments should have the right to vote on a trade agreement between the EU and Singapore. The case could affect the ratification of other trade agreements, including CETA, a controversial EU-Canada deal. A final ruling is expected in spring 2017.
Greenpeace EU trade policy adviser Shira Stanton said: “We welcome the Advocate General’s opinion and are fairly confident that the Court of Justice will reach the same conclusion in its ruling in 2017. The European Parliament and the Commission should not ignore this opinion, and should wait for the Court’s final decision in 2017 before taking any further decision on CETA. The European Parliament should now ask the Court for its view on CETA’s investment protection mechanism.”
Advocate General Sharpston stressed that her opinion is ‘without prejudice’ to the issue of the compatibility of the Investment Court System with EU law. This means that, while her opinion covers who should decide on different elements of trade deals, it does not imply that elements such as ISDS or the Investment Court System are legal.
