• Call: +62
  • E-mail: sahita.institute@hints.id
Sahita Institure
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Campaign
    • Trade Justice
    • Digital Justice
    • Energy Transtition
  • Collective Idea
    • Visual Movement
    • Article
  • News
  • Publication
No Result
View All Result
Sahita Institute
No Result
View All Result

A threat to climate action, ISDS should be removed from the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand FTA (AANZFTA)

June 3, 2026
in Article, Collective Idea
Home Collective Idea Article
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

The ten ASEAN countries and Australia and New Zealand have agreed to review investor rights to sue governments known as Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in the updated AANZFTA agreement in the second half of 2026. Consensus of all governments is needed to remove or change ISDS.

What is investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and why we oppose it

 ISDS is a set of rules in some trade and investment agreements that allows foreign (but not local) investors to claim billions of dollars from governments in compensation for law or policy changes, or even planning and judicial decisions, if they can convince an international tribunal that these will reduce their expected future profits, even if the change is for health, environmental or other public interest reasons.

ISDS was originally developed in the post-colonial period after the second world war to compensate international investors for the direct expropriation or taking of property by governments. However, over the past 60 years foreign investor rights have been expanded to include “indirect” expropriation and “legitimate expectations”, which do not exist in most national legal systems. Investors can claim that they were not consulted adequately about the change or did not expect it when they made the investment. Investors have used ISDS against laws and policies protecting workers’ rights, and public health and the environment . Thailand was sued by the Australian Kingsgate mining company after toxic waste led to closure of its mine. Indonesia was sued by the Australian Churchill mining company after local officials revoked its mining license based on forged documents. Threats of ISDS are being used to  discourage democratically-decided policies and to challenge environmental assessments or court decisions. Fears of long, expensive and unpredictable cases can also have a chilling effect on central and local governments.

ISDS is now outdated and many governments are rejecting it. There is no compelling evidence that agreements with ISDS result in increased Foreign Direct Investment. There are increasing numbers of huge claims against developing countries. In 2019, an ISDS tribunal ordered Pakistan to pay $ US 5.8 billion to a mining company, which was almost equivalent to an emergency loan from the International Monetary Fund to address Pakistan’s economic crisis. India, Indonesia, South Africa and Ecuador have cancelled old investment agreements with ISDS. Brazil has never agreed to ISDS. Capital exporting countries are now also resisting ISDS. Australia and New Zealand have policies against ISDS. The European Union and the United Kingdom have withdrawn from the Energy Charter Treaty because its ISDS provisions were being used by fossil fuel companies against government policies to address climate change.

 

Mining companies use ISDS to challenge democratic decisions on environment and development

 Australian billionaire Clive Palmer has registered his mining company, Zeph Investments, in Singapore and claimed to be a Singaporean investor. He then used foreign investor rights in AANZFTA to sue the Australian government for a total of around $420bn in four separate cases before an international investment tribunal, three relating to coal mining and energy licenses. Palmer’s first claim was for $300bn after he lost a High Court appeal against a Western Australian government decision to refuse an iron ore mining license. The last three claims for a total of $120bn are because a Queensland Court refused his coal mining license and a license for a coal-fired power plant for environmental reasons, including increased carbon emissions.

In September 2025 the international tribunal dismissed Palmer’s claim to be a Singaporean investor in the first WA iron ore case and ordered him to pay the Australian government legal costs of $13.6m. But Palmer is challenging the tribunal’s decision in the federal supreme court of Switzerland. The Swiss court is not an appeal mechanism for the tribunal and cannot consider the broad merits of the case, only technical legal issues. This is a delaying tactic. The three coal-related cases will proceed and the Australian government could have to spend tens of millions defending each one. Palmer’s claims expose how ISDS can be manipulated to maximise costs to governments.

ASEAN countries also face specific threats related to the climate crisis and development policies because they are rich in critical minerals needed for the transition to renewable energy, which has increased global demand. Some ASEAN countries have intensified their efforts to process these minerals to add value, rather than export raw materials. For example, Indonesia’s restrictions on raw materials exports have been part of a broader development strategy for value-added exports which was challenged in the past through an ISDS case brought by Newmont mining under the Netherlands-Indonesia Bilateral Investment Treaty before Indonesia terminated that treaty. The rush to mine critical minerals could see ISDS threats against national development policies from mining companies based in Australia, New Zealand or Singapore or other ASEAN countries using ISDS in the AANZFTA .

 

ISDS recognised by governments and the United Nations as a major obstacle to climate action

 There is a growing global list of ISDS cases from fossil fuel companies against government decisions to reduce carbon emissions. A recent United Nations Report concluded that ISDS is a “major obstacle” to government action on climate change.

The November 2025 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change report Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T on climate financing explicitly called out ISDS in trade agreements as a systemic barrier to financing climate action in developing countries (p.52):

A further systemic barrier reflects outdated clauses used in over 2,000 investment treaties that can impact the sovereign policy-making space of developing countries. Investment treaties with investor-state dispute settlements provisions allow foreign investors to claim compensation against government measures that may challenge their business interests. Potential damages liability can affect policy decisions to set enabling environments for climate action. Up to USD 83 billion has been awarded through 349 investor-state disputes for policy actions such as denial of permits for GHG emissions-intensive exploration, extraction, or infrastructure. Developing countries are vulnerable to over 60 per cent of potential Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) claims due to climate action.

Irene Vélez Torres, the environment minister of Colombia, spoke at the UN Climate Change conference in November 2025, saying “No government should have to choose between protecting nature and its people, and protecting itself from arbitrators.” Columbia has since announced its withdrawal from ISDS arrangements.

Australia and New Zealand have a legally binding side-letter in AANZFTA which they agree not to apply ISDS provisions to each other. Other countries have applied selective modifications to the application of ISDS provisions. We ask governments to:

  1. Support the removal of ISDS provisions from
  2. If consensus is not reached to remove ISDS governments should seek legally binding bilateral side letters with other governments not to apply ISDS to each other.

List of endorsing organizations:

National organisations from ASEAN countries, Australia, and Aotearoa/New Zealand

1.Ngā Toki WhakarururangaAotearoa/New Zealand
2.Greenpeace AotearoaAotearoa/New Zealand
3.Coromandel Watchdog of HaurakiAotearoa/New Zealand
4.Campaign Against Foreign Control of AotearoaAotearoa/New Zealand
5.The Environment Council of Central QueenslandAustralia
6.Australian Fair Trade and Investment NetworkAustralia
7.Green Music AustraliaAustralia
8.Friends of the Earth AustraliaAustralia
9.AidWatchAustralia
10.Oxfam AustraliaAustralia
11.Philippines Australia Union LinkAustralia
12.Pax Christi AustraliaAustralia
13.Missionaries of the Sacred Heart Justice and Peace CentreAustralia
14.Philippines Australia Union LinkAustralia
15.Public Health Association AustraliaAustralia
16.Friends of the AustraliaAustralia
17.GeneEthics LtdAustralia
18.Union Aid Abroad – APHEDAAustralia
19.New South Wales Teachers FederationAustralia
20.Climate Action Network AustraliaAustralia
21.GeneEthics LtdAustralia
22.Peoples Climate AssemblyAustralia
23.Darling Downs Environment CouncilAustralia
24.Lighter FootprintsAustralia
25.ACHRPAustralia
26.Australian Education Union Federal OfficeAustralia
27.Nillumbik Climate Action TeamAustralia
28.Australian Council of Trade UnionsAustralia
29.Uniting Church in Australia, Synod of Victoria and TasmaniaAustralia
30.Yarra Climate Action Now (YCAN)Australia
31.Australian Manufacturing Workers’ UnionAustralia
32.Reconciliation for Western SydneyAustralia
33.Darling Downs Environment CouncilAustralia
34.Environment Council of Central QueenslandAustralia
35.Sutherland Shire Environment CentreAustralia
36.Migrante Australia of NSWAustralia
37.Combined Retired Union Members Association (CRUMA)Australia
38.Climate Action Burwood-Canada BayAustralia
39.Sydney Peace & Justice CoalitionAustralia
40.Climate Justice UnionAustralia
41.ActionAid AustraliaAustralia
42.International Grail Justice and Trade NetworkAustralia
43.Social Action for Community and Development (SACD)Cambodia
44.Publish What You Pay (PWYP) IndonesiaIndonesia
45.Indonesia for Global Justice (IGJ)Indonesia
46.Sahita Institute (HINTS)Indonesia
47.LCITIIndonesia
48.KRuHAIndonesia
49.PuanifestoIndonesia
50.International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID)Indonesia
51.World Food Forum Indonesia ChapterIndonesia
52.EkomarinIndonesia
53.FSP FARKES REFORMASIIndonesia
54.Federasi Perjuangan Buruh IndonesiaIndonesia
55.POKJA 30 KALTIMIndonesia
56.Center for Knowledge IndonesiaIndonesia
57.LePMILIndonesia
58.SRI InstituteIndonesia
59.Treat Every Environment Special Sdn BhdMalaysia
60.Gabungan Darurat Iklim Malaysia BerhadMalaysia
61.Independent Advocacy for Accessibility Affordable Medicines MalaysiaMalaysia
62.Gabungan Darurat Iklim Malaysia BerhadMalaysia
63.Consumers’ Association of PenangMalaysia
64.Sahabat Alam Malaysia (Friends of the Earth)Malaysia
65.Forum Kedaulatan Makanan Malaysia (FKMM)Malaysia
66.Monitoring Sustainability of GlobalisationMalaysia
67.Sustainable Development Network Malaysia (SUSDEN Malaysia)Malaysia
68.RURAL MALAYSIA – Persatuan Pengguna Luar Bandar & Ekologi MalaysiaMalaysia
69.Jaringan Ekologi Dan IklimMalaysia
70.Health Action International Asia PacificMalaysia
71.Environmental Protection Society of MalaysiaMalaysia
72.Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO)Philippines
73.Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM)Philippines
74.Kilusan para sa Repormang Agraryo at Katarungang Panlipunan (KATARUNGAN)Philippines
75.Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center-Friends of the Earth PhilippinesPhilippines
76.Thai Network of People Living with HIV/AIDSThailand
77.FTA WatchThailand
78.NatureWize VietnamVietnam

International and regional organisations with members in ASEAN, Australia, and Aotearoa/New Zealand

1.Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD)
2.Climate Action Network Southeast Asia
3.Focus on the Global South
4.GRAIN
5.Pacific Youth Platform
6.The Climate Reality Project Australia & Pacific
7.Third World Network
8.Transnational Institute (TNI)
Tags: AANZFTAASEANClimateClimateActionClimateFinanceClimateJusticeClimatePolicyDefendSovereigntyEndFossilFuelPowerEnvironmentalJusticeFairTradeGlobalClimateActionGreenFuturehintsHumanRightsJustTransitionNoISDSPeopleOverProfitProtectDemocracyStopISDSSustainableDevelopmentTradeJustice
Previous Post

Koalisi MKE Bersama PWYP Indonesia dan INFID Kritik Rencana Pengecualian DHE SDA, Jangan Sampai Untungkan Korporasi Asing

admin_hints

admin_hints

Discussion about this post

Follow Us

    © 2022 - Sahita Institute

    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    No Result
    View All Result
    • Home
    • About Us
    • Campaign
      • Trade Justice
      • Digital Justice
      • Energy Transtition
    • Collective Idea
      • Visual Movement
      • Article
    • News
    • Publication

    © 2022 Sahita Institute