EU Constitutional Law as Restraint for EU Trade and Investment Agreements: The Example of CETA and Investor-State Dispute Settlement - European Investment Law and Arbitration Review View EU Constitutional Law as Restraint for EU Trade and Investment Agreements: The Example of CETA and Investor-State Dispute Settlement by - European Investment Law and Arbitration Review EU Constitutional Law as Restraint for EU Trade and Investment Agreements: The Example of CETA and Investor-State Dispute Settlement 2 1

The civil society protests against EU free trade agreements (FTAS) and investment arbitration reflect the failure of EU institutions to take “decisions as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen” (Article 1 TEU) and to protect the rights of citizens also in external market regulations (Articles 3, 21 TEU). The less EU institutions comply with the legal requirements (e.g. in Articles 2, 9–12 TEU) of protecting constitutional, representative, participatory and deliberate democracy also in external market regulations, the less parliamentary approval of secretly negotiated FTAS guarantees democratic legitimacy and consistency of FTAS with EU constitutional law. Fundamental rights limit all EU governance powers, including trade and investment policy powers of the EU. The disregard for fundamental rights and judicial remedies of citizens in FTAS concluded by the EU with third countries is neither necessary nor justifiable in terms of Article 52 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Transatlantic FTAS on multilevel market regulation and protection of public goods should be designed as ‘democratic law’, which citizens are entitled to invoke and enforce in domestic jurisdictions as integral parts of EU law.

European Investment Law and Arbitration Review