> This shit is important for increasing investor confidence in countries with nascent court systems and political systems used to corruption and nepotism.
Isn't it up to a country to make itself attractive to investors, i.e. by not pulling all that shit?
Every country's leader will tell foreign investors that there is no chance that their business will be regulated differently than their nephew's competing in the same space. Investors can trust them a lot more if the country's continued enjoyment of increased foreign demand for their exports lies in the balance.
"Isn't it up to a country to make itself attractive to investors, i.e. by not pulling all that shit?"
Yes, but it would defeat the purpose of a trade agreement.
Moreover, if country ABC signs the agreement, indicating 'they won'd do this BS' - and then they actually do do it - then they get access to other markets while cheating.
The agreement is supposed to prevent countries from cheating.
It has a side effect of preventing governments from doing things they ought to do - for example, punishing international companies from polluting etc..
It's a tricky problem.
There should be clauses that allow governments to make laws to stop companies from polluting etc.
Isn't it up to a country to make itself attractive to investors, i.e. by not pulling all that shit?