NAFTA Tribunal to Hear Challenge To US Protections

NAFTA Tribunal to Hear Foreign Challenge to US Protections for the Environment and Native Americans

Glamis Gold (Canada) v. USA hearing in Washington, D.C., August 12-17, 2007: Glamis's claim highlights the power the United States is giving foreign corporations -- through trade agreements like the Peru and Panama free trade agreements under study.

Who:
Glamis Gold, Ltd. v. The United States of America

What:
NAFTA arbitration administered by the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes

Where:
Room H1-200, Building H, 600 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. (Visitors must check in at the Building H visitor's entrance and receive a pass for entry.)

When:
August 12-17, 2007
9:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m.

Background:
In the early 1990s, Glamis Gold, Ltd. a Canadian gold mining corporation, proposed an open-pit, cyanide heap leach gold mine in the California desert. This massive mining operation would have destroyed a pristine desert wilderness area, consumed 389 million gallons of desert groundwater annually, and impacted sites sacred to the Quechan Indian Nation.

In 2001, Clinton Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt refused to approve Glamis's mining plan because of the threat it posed to the sacred tribal lands. California later passed a law requiring open pit mines to be refilled after mining was completed, a process the company argues is too expensive to make the mine profitable. The Bush administration reversed the Babbitt decision, but still hasn't issued the necessary permits.

The California reclamation law is still on the books. However, the company claims the California law and the Babbitt denial violate NAFTA, which provides special protection for the profits of foreign companies. In July 2003, Glamis Gold filed a US$50 million claim against the United States for profits it claims to have lost as a result of the actions taken by California and the federal government to protect the environment and indigenous communities.

Although the law and regulations apply broadly to all open-pit mines and investors throughout the state, Glamis argues that federal and state actions violate two central rules in NAFTA Chapter 11: the prohibition on expropriation, and the requirement to provide "fair and equitable" treatment to foreign investors.

Glamis's claim highlights the power the United States is giving foreign corporations -- through trade agreements like the Peru and Panama free trade agreements Congress is presently considering -- to avoid and undermine protections for the environment, indigenous rights and other public concerns.

In 2006, environmental groups filed an amicus petition in defense of the right of the US and state governments to protect important interests, including the desert resources and Quechan sacred sites at stake in this case.

Read the environmental brief here:

http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/glamis-amicus-brief-101606.pdf

SOURCE Earthjustice

ENDS

More: Latest World News | Top World News | World Digest | Archives

© Scoop Media