Separate Comments of TEPAC Members

The authors argue that the U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore FTAs grant foreign investors substantive rights exceeding those of domestic investors under U.S. law, particularly regarding expropriation and minimum standard of treatment. They highlight the lack of a general environmental exception in the investment chapters and express concern that the investor-state dispute mechanism undermines the rule of law and national security while lacking citizen enforcement mechanisms.

• The authors contend that the U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore FTAs violate the Trade Act of 2002 because they provide foreign investors with "greater substantive rights" than domestic investors enjoy under U.S. law, specifically through the use of ad hoc panels not bound by U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
• The inclusion of "fair and equitable treatment" as a minimum standard of treatment is criticized for being inherently subjective and lacking a corresponding right in U.S. law, potentially allowing foreign investors to seek monetary damages where U.S. investors would be limited to injunctive relief under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• The agreements are criticized for failing to include a general environmental exception for the investment chapter, which the authors argue makes international investment rules a "significant threat" to public interest environmental policies.
• The authors argue that the investor-state dispute mechanism undermines the rule of law in Chile and Singapore by allowing investors to bypass national legal systems without first exhausting local administrative and judicial remedies.
• The document identifies a lack of balance in international economic law, noting that while corporate investors have explicit enforcement mechanisms, there is no citizen enforcement mechanism in either agreement, unlike the NAFTA Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
• The authors express concern that the aggressive use of investor-state mechanisms by U.S. corporations against developing countries could harm U.S. national security by creating "anti-American conditions."

APA

Zaelke, D., O’Reagan, F., & Karpatkin, R. H. (2003). Separate Comments of TEPAC Members. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Agreements_27Feb03.pdf

Chicago

Zaelke, Durwood, Fred O’Reagan, and Rhoda H. Karpatkin. Separate Comments of TEPAC Members. Center for International Environmental Law, 2003. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Agreements_27Feb03.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Zaelke |first1=Durwood |last2=O’Reagan |first2=Fred |last3=Karpatkin |first3=Rhoda H. |title=Separate Comments of TEPAC Members |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=27 February 2003 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Agreements_27Feb03.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{zaelke2003separate, author = {Zaelke, Durwood and O’Reagan, Fred and Karpatkin, Rhoda H.}, title = {{Separate Comments of TEPAC Members}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2003}, month = feb, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TEPAC_Agreements_27Feb03.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }