In addition to promoting direct investment through a comprehensive investment protection agreement, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement includes the intention to complement and even standardize European and Canadian standards in certain sectors. This must be achieved by removing non-tariff barriers that would contribute to increasing the interdependence between cultural, social, economic and environmental dimensions. Expected compliance between the parties with technical rules, standards, rules and evaluation procedures between the parties would result in a reduction in costs for businesses as a result of a simplification of formalities in the area of trade in goods and services. In addition, proponents argue that this would also have a positive impact on consumers with a view to a wider choice of products, as it allows for a more efficient and faster flow of goods under an equivalent assessment procedure in both countries (EC, 2018d). Critics say the agreement is too pro-economy and can lead to lower regulatory standards. Opponents of CETA are still unconvinced of reforms to investment rules and argue that these foreign investors could grant special privileges and deter governments from legislating in the public interest for fear of litigation. The Belgian government has asked the European Court of Justice to rule on the compatibility of CETA with EU law. In April 2019, the ECJ decided that CETA was compatible with EU law. The process of ratifying trade agreements – in particular the fact that CETA was applied on an interim basis – that is, before the parliaments of EU Member States had the opportunity to ratify it – was also criticised. This article summarizes the liberal achievements of the recent Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union (EU), which is considered the most panopic international trade and investment agreement Canada has concluded in two decades, since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994 and Canada`s accession to the WTO agreements (WTO) in 19951 , in addition to the reduction of customs barriers in 1994 11. , which each party should respect in order to improve cooperation, protect certain intellectual property rights and improve market access. B, for example with respect to foreign direct investment (SIR, 2018, p. 6 to 8).
Initially, NAFTA members focused primarily on establishing a dispute resolution mechanism and intellectual property rights provisions, but then agreed to implement two alternative environmental and labour agreements, following widespread criticism from non-governmental and environmental groups (CFRR). , 2018).