EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment
protection would have been desirable. The issue continues to be of great importance for European companies. There are still considerable deficits in China, both in the enforceability of existing rights and in the award of adequate damages. Strengthening the Chinese judicial system, more effective protection of trade secrets or more effective patent procedures should be on the EU Commission's list of demands. Investment protection A significant focus of an investment agreement is the area of investment protection, which was put on hold in the CAI and will have to be taken up in future negotiations. On investment protection, in particular the issue of investor-state arbitration, there are apparently currently irreconcilable differences. Both sides have agreed in the CAI that this area should also be concluded within two years of the signing of CAI. The EU should put all its energy into establishing a modern and effective mechanism for resolving investment disputes - this is the central element of all of Germany's existing investment protection agreements. The EU has already developed a forward-looking standard that could become a global standard through inclusion in the agreement. This standard addresses criticism of arbitration under international law, such as that raised by civil society in the course of the discussions on TTIP. For example, unjustified lawsuits should be curbed. At the same time, the regulatory sovereignty of states in matters of sustainable policy is to be protected and, to this end, investment disputes are to be heard before state-appointed permanent arbitration tribunals. After the EU has already been able to apply this standard, which is also internationally trend-setting, in its investment agreements with Canada and Vietnam, a conclusion with China offers the opportunity to further establish such an investment protection standard at the global level, which enjoys broad acceptance and thus promotes investment. The BDI therefore welcomes the fact that the bilateral German-Chinese investment treaty, which ensures a high level of investment protection, will remain in force for the time being. Brussels and Beijing should agree on the goal of extending the investment agreement to investment protection in a second step. It is imperative that the high level of protection of the bilateral treaties be achieved. At the same time, China should also seize the opportunity offered by the EU standard for the development of investment protection under international law in its own interest. This could not only put China and the EU on a more sustainable footing in their mutual investment relations, but also set an important milestone towards a multilateral solution for the protection of cross-border investments, which has been worked on at the UN level for several years (UNCITRAL's work on a "Multilateral Investment Court").
12
