We hear that the new ISDS, or ISDS 2.0, has protections in it saying that this doesn't prevent either of the parties from legislating protections for human rights or the environment.
We have a situation in Ecuador with the Loma Larga mega-mining project, owned by Dundee Precious Metals, which is almost 8,000 hectares of paramo. We've had two binding referendums of Ecuadorean citizens. More than 80% are in favour of stopping these mining projects, because they're affecting the water supply for Cuenca, with 600,000 people, and yet the Ecuadorean government and the company insist on advancing the project in violation of the right to political participation.
I guess I'm skeptical; let's say a new Ecuadorean government came in and said, “Sorry, Dundee, you can't go ahead. We've had these referenda, and we are pulling the rights to mine here.” Would that protect the Ecuadorean people or would those go ahead? It seems that other situations have arisen where this doesn't really protect those governments from legislating about human rights or the environment.