Despite vocal contestation and fears of domestic
institutional deadlock over its trade negotiations,
the European Union has proven resilient in its trade
policy, notably by concluding bilateral trade and
investment agreements with important partners,
including two across the North Atlantic, Canada
and Mexico.
> A professionally orchestrated NGO campaign
against TTIP and CETA that fed scepticism in several
EU member states was crowned with mixed
success. Whereas TTIP negotiations were put on
hold, CETA finally proceeded. The lack of a broad
pan-European opposition and the strong
consensual decision-making processes in the EU
incentivised policy-makers to accommodate
objections, tread carefully and craft compromise.
> This process has been further facilitated by the May
2017 Singapore ruling of the Court of Justice of the
EU which created room for trade agreements to be
split according to exclusive and shared
competences. As a result, new agreements such as
those with Singapore or Japan now typically
embrace three agreements in order to expedite
ratification: trade, investment protection and
political cooperation.
> Separating trade and investment agreements
makes it more difficult for special interests to hold
free trade agreements hostage and locates
parliamentary scrutiny at the European level, while
investment agreements face additional ratification
by member state parliaments – and a pending
Court Opinion
