There has been widespread criticism and mobilization against trade and investment agreements, particularly in the face of the idea of governments focusing exclusively on commercial interests in negotiations, regardless of their human rights, environmental and development commitments. A wide range of case studies show that pressure from international trade and investment rules to open borders to goods and services, the creation of a « business-friendly » environment for foreign direct investment, and the strengthening of intellectual property rights have often contributed to undermining the protection and realization of human rights. Countries enter into enterprise agreements primarily to protect and indirectly encourage foreign investment and, increasingly, to liberalize these investments. The IIAs provide companies and individuals of contracting parties with enhanced security and security under international law when they invest or set up a business in other countries parties to the agreement. Reducing the investment risk associated with an IGE is designed to encourage businesses and individuals to invest in the country that AI has concluded. In this context, it is important to allow foreign investors to settle disputes with the host country through international arbitrations and not just through the host country`s national courts. Considerable efforts must be made to express the added value of human rights, including the right to development, and the application of all electoral districts, in particular the World Trade Organization and other actors involved in trade and investment, on the importance of policy coherence, taking into account human rights obligations, norms and principles. , the need for an assessment and assessment of human rights impacts. , flexibilities and exceptions, such as . B in TRIPS, and corrective action. Another new development of the global AI system is the strengthening of the conclusion of such agreements between developing countries.
In the past, industrialized countries have generally concluded IAS standards to protect their companies from foreign investment, while developing countries have tended to sign CEWs to encourage and encourage foreign direct investment flows from industrialized countries. The current trend towards intensifying the conclusions of EIT countries among developing countries reflects the economic changes that underlie international investment relations. Developing and emerging countries are not only tourist destinations, but also important countries of origin of FDI flows. In keeping with their emerging role as foreign investors and improving their economic competitiveness, developing countries increasingly have a dual interest in promoting foreign direct investment flows, but also in protecting their companies` investments abroad. The typical provisions of BITs and ITPs are clauses relating to the standards for the protection and treatment of foreign investment, which generally deal with issues such as fair and equitable treatment, total protection and security, national treatment and the most frequent treatment of nations.  Provisions for compensation for losses suffered by foreign investors as a result of expropriation or war and dispute are generally an essential element of these agreements. Most of them also regulate the cross-border transfer of funds related to foreign investment. Environmental regulations are also becoming more common in I2As. :104 The report is the culmination of an ex ante assessment of the impact of the Commission on Gas and Consumer Protection on human rights. The Human Rights Impact Analysis calls for prioritizing the concerns of all members of society and their human rights in the negotiation, development and final implementation of the Framework Agreement through all inclusive, consultative and