Ceci est une version HTML d'une pièce jointe de la demande d'accès à l'information 'TTIP lobbying'.




Ref. Ares(2015)2322226 - 03/06/2015
Ref. Ares(2017)3665888 - 20/07/2017
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Directorate-General for Trade 
Directorate B - Services and Investment, Intellectual Property and Public Procurement 
Investment 
Brussels, 03.06.2015 
Trade B2/ Art. 4.1b
NOTE TO THE FILE 
Subject:  
Promotion and Protection of Foreign Direct Investments: 
Which global framework is needed? 
Mission report on Panel Discussion Berlin, 7th May 2015
 
The Meeting – which took place under Chatham House rules - was organized by the 
German association of industry (BDI) together with the International Chamber of 
Commerce Germany and DIHK. COM participated in Panel Discussion II (see below). 
Participants came from Industry, Politics, Ministries, EU Embassies. COM participant 
(and rapporteur):  Art. 4.1b  (DG TRADE B.2) 
Agenda: see attachment 1 
List of participants see attachment 2 
COM Speaking note (English version) see attachment 3. 
The meeting was structured in three parts:  
1. Introductory statements by the President of ICC Germany and Senior Managing
Directors of BDI and DIHK. 
2. Panel Discussion I: Foreign Direct Investment of German enterprises – which global
framework do companies need? 
3 Panel Discussion II : Foreign Direct Investment and the future of International 
Investment Protection 
Flash summary: 
Broad industry support for investment protection and EU investment agreements. Overall 
positive views on investment reform envisaged in the EU concept paper presented on 6 
May. Sceptic views on ISDS reform by a German law firm. UNCTAD announced 
presentation of the World Investment Report focussing on options for investment 
protection reform on 24th June in Geneva. 
Detailed report: 
Introductory statements: 
Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111 

Mr. Brandt (President ICC Germany) underlined that every new investment/business 
activity helps creating work places in the home country. He regretted that the ISDS 
system has been discredited by public voices and advocated to use the current debate in 
order to improve the system and not to abolish it all together. Improving the system 
would include making it more user friendly for SMEs. 
Outside the scope of the request
Mr. Brandt noted that both, the Concept paper presented by COM Malmström (on 6th 
May) and the ideas on an investment chapter presented by the German Minister of 
Economy Gabriel, mention the possibility of a permanent court for investment disputes. 
In the view of ICC the question remains how ISDS procedures are going to be conducted 
in the meanwhile (until such a court comes into existence).  
Outside the scope of the request
Outside the scope of the request
Mr. Maier (Board of Directors BDI) underlined the importance of a global playing field 
and therefore the necessity for a global framework for investment. 
Outside the scope of the request
As regards TTIP Mr. Maier reminded that US already 
considers their US model as the optimal investment protection. An EU tect – following 
the Commissioner's concept paper – could nevertheless set the new benchmark – may be 
even for a future multilateral framework. 
Panel I  Foreign Direct Investment of German enterprises – which global framework do 
companies need? 

The Panel consisted of a Member of the German Parliament (MP Beyer/CDU), a senior 
manager from Siemens AG, the German Ministry of Economy (Ms Krumpholz), a 
representative from Germany Trade and Invest and the head of the Financial section of 
the German development Agency (DEG). 
MP Beyer welcomed a fact oriented public discussion on investment as a "good thing" 
as in past, many things had developed into a wrong direction. If the outcome of this 
discussion were not balanced no Parliament would give its consent to investment texts, 
stressed MP Beyer who also took the view that without investment protection there will 
be no TTIP with the US. 
Art. 4.1a


According to MP Beyer it will be possible to come to an agreement 
with the US but a certain danger for the negotiations could lay in the desire to set a new 
gold standard. The effort to develop a common investment chapter with the US is 
nevertheless laudable and could become a model for the world, Mr. Beyer concluded. 
Outside the scope of the request
Outside the scope of the request
Outside the scope of the request
Outside the scope of the request
Panel II: Foreign Direct Investment and the future of International Investment Protection 
The Panel consisted of a Member from UNCTAD (Joachim Karl), Prof. Tietje 
(University Halle-Wittenberg), Prof Wolkewitz (Wintershall Holding), Ms Konrad 
(Lawfirm Mc Dermott Will & Emery) and the rapporteur (LTT/Speaking Notes – see 
attachment 3). 
 Joachim Karl (UNCTAD) described - from an UNCTAD perspective - Developing 
countries recent attitude to investment agreements. UNCTAD sees a first group of 
countries in waiting position, observing ongoing negotiations (CETA, TTIP, TPP).   
Outside the scope of the request


Outside the scope of the request
Prof Tietje analysed the strengths and weaknesses of investment protection as an area of 
legal crosscutting issues ("Querschnittsmaterie") between formalised national law and 
negotiated international agreements. Mr. Tietje saw as a problem that some investment 
principles in the past were kept vague and potentially broad in range. He welcomed new 
efforts (esp. by UNCITRAL and by the COM) to increase Transparency in international 
arbitration. 
Prof Wolkewitz considered investment arbitration as necessary and saw IIAs as element 
of investment decision making. 
Ms Konrad described from her experience that SMEs are using ISDS more often than 
multinational enterprises – Siemens (participating in Panel 1, see above) would also do 
well without IIAs, while SMEs need this instrument of last resort. 
Outside the scope of the request
COM as LTT (see attachment 3). Questions were raised on ISDS reform (parallelism 
between bilateral investment arbitration and creation of an international court), the 
concept paper and on legal scrubbing of CETA.  
Art. 4.1b
Annexes: 
- Agenda 
- Speaking notes 
Cc:  R. Schlegelmilch,  Art. 4.1b
,  Unit B.2,   Art. 4.1b ,  Art. 4.1b
 (F.2), 
Art. 4.1b  (A.3), Art. 4.1b
 (E.1)