Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 54

Paragraph

Paragraph text: The Colombia Centre on Sustainable Investment submitted an application to file a written submission in the case, but was denied by the tribunal. The amicus submission had pointed to the inconsistency between the investor's understanding of what is meant by "an investment" and the definition in the free trade agreement. Furthermore, it had raised the consequent non-applicability of the fair and equitable treatment standard and the failure to demonstrate legitimate expectations, even if that standard had been applied. Similarly, it had pointed to the central role that the requirement to seek and obtain free, prior and informed consent should play in the assessment of the facts and the determination of the award, and the urgency of ensuring compliance with this requirement, in the light of the extensive mining-related social conflict throughout Peru. According to the submission, providing compensation to the company would be equivalent to granting it a right to exploitation and would disregard indigenous peoples' rights.

Topic(s)

Person(s) affected

Reference: SR Indigenous Peoples, Report to the HRC (2016), A/HRC/33/42, para. 54.

Paragraph focus: Examples of investor-State dispute settlements involving indigenous peoples' rights