Separate Comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) submitted comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement (FTA), arguing that its investment chapter fails to meet the Trade Act of 2002 mandate that foreign investors receive no greater substantive rights than domestic investors. CIEL expresses concern that the investor-state dispute mechanism undermines national regulatory powers, lacks an appellate process, and lacks a general environmental exception, potentially threatening public health and environmental protections.

• The U.S.-Morocco FTA's investment chapter is criticized for failing to comply with the Trade Act of 2002, which mandates that new international investment rules not provide foreign investors with "greater substantive rights" than domestic investors under U.S. law.
• CIEL argues that the investor-state dispute mechanism in the agreement allows investors to bypass national legal systems, which stunts the development of those systems and threatens the ability of governments to regulate in the public interest.
• The agreement is criticized for lacking a general environmental exception in its investment chapter, which CIEL claims makes international investment rules a "significant threat" to environmental and public health policies.
• CIEL contends that the expropriation provisions in the FTA are flawed because they reference a limited set of Supreme Court factors without the essential explanations and limitations found in U.S. jurisprudence, such as the requirement that government action must permanently interfere with a property in its entirety to be a taking.
• The inclusion of the "fair and equitable treatment" standard is viewed as dangerous because it is subjective, lacks a corresponding right under U.S. law, and could allow arbitral tribunals to grant monetary damages where a U.S. investor would only be entitled to injunctive relief under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• CIEL notes a lack of evidence that investment rules are necessary for bilateral relations with Morocco, stating there is no public information suggesting Morocco has mistreated U.S. investors or that its judicial system cannot resolve such complaints.

APA

Magraw, D., & Karpatkin, R. H. (2004). Separate Comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Comments_Morocco.pdf

Chicago

Magraw, Daniel, and Rhoda H. Karpatkin. Separate Comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement. Center for International Environmental Law, 2004. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Comments_Morocco.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Magraw |first1=Daniel |last2=Karpatkin |first2=Rhoda H. |title=Separate Comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=6 April 2004 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Comments_Morocco.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{magraw2004separate, author = {Magraw, Daniel and Karpatkin, Rhoda H.}, title = {{Separate Comments on the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2004}, month = apr, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Comments_Morocco.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }