Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK, let's go to the facts: 1. A treaty is negotiated between the two major markets in the world. 2. We know that when this kind of treaties are passed is almost impossible to go back. 3. We know that the most important input to those treaties come from corporations. 4. The conversations happen in secret. 5. The democratic representatives are not allowed to read the treaty except in a hurry and without legal help. 6.…
Some further facts: - the treaty tries to abolish market regulation differences between the two markets - costumer protection regulations between the US and the EU are incompatible - In the US often e.g. chemicals are allowed until proven hazardous, in the EU they are outlawed until proven harmless - the tribunals will operate outside the normal juridical systems of the US and the EU
- No differences, but
- US consumer protection (which is hardly any)
- US (bio)chemical regulations
- A non-conformative tribunal which is not elected, not governed, has no oversight and has no basis in any civil law (as you cannot appeal/trail as a civilian if you are disadvantaged by its rulings)