Take secret arbitration, where foreign investors sue countries, out of trade agreements, and settle such disputes in open courts instead

The proposal in detail

This covers the system, found in the investment chapters of trade agreements and in two-country investment treaties, that lets a foreign investor sue the host country's government directly in international arbitration. Under this system, private arbitrators chosen by the parties hear the case in secret, and there is almost no way to appeal. The proposal first makes it a principle for every country not to include this clause in newly signed agreements. For existing agreements, countries agree with their partners to delete the clause, and also cancel the clauses that keep protection going for many years after an agreement ends. Disputes with foreign investors are first handled in the host country's own courts. Only where there is clear injustice, such as being denied a trial or a ruling left unresolved without reason, would the investor's home government take it up as a dispute between countries, or it would go to a permanent international investment court that countries build together. The judges of this court are appointed to fixed terms as public servants, are barred from working as lawyers on the side, hold hearings and give rulings in public, have levels of appeal, and let affected residents and groups submit written opinions. Compensation is limited to the money actually invested and the value of assets lost through discriminatory seizure, and does not include expected future profits. Public health, environmental, labor and tax rules that make no distinction between domestic and foreign companies cannot be challenged, even if they reduce an investor's profits. Investors cover investment risks themselves with public or private political risk insurance.