This is from the Japanese government's list of "Suspended Provisions" in the TPP:
2. Investment Agreement and Investment Authorisation (ISDS applies to these)
9.1 Definitions - suspend “investment agreement” and “investment authorisation” and associated Footnotes (5 - 11)
9.19.1 Submission of Claim to Arbitration - a(i) B and C; (b)(i) B and C (investment authorisation or investment agreement), chausette, footnote 31
9.19.2 Submission of Claim to Arbitration, footnote 32
9.19.3 Submission of Claim to Arbitration - (b) delete investment authorisation or investment agreement
9.22.5 Selection of Arbitrators
9.25.2 Governing Law
Annex 9-L Investment Agreements
What does it mean that these provisions are suspended? Here's what New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says it means:
"There has been a narrowing of [investor-state dispute settlement clauses (ISDS)] provisions in three areas. One, ISDS no longer applies to investor screening. The second, anyone who takes up a contract with a Government is no longer able to sue through ISDS, but must go through domestic procedures instead. The third relates to financial services.
"New Zealand advocated strongly and managed to narrow those provisions around ISDS to a place where they now are similar to previous agreements New Zealand has signed, including the China FTA and the Malaysian FTA.
...
She says the most important concession New Zealand has won is making the Overseas Investment Act immune to ISDS challenges.
"The [Overseas Investment Office] and that process is exempt from ISDS clauses. That is probably one of the most important suspended clauses that we managed to negotiate."
Beyond that issue, New Zealand might try to get out of ISDS in the TPP altogether:
And there's the chance New Zealand could negotiate individual agreements with different countries around ISDS clauses.
"We've had talks with a number of other countries who in principle have agreed to side letters as well. Those will not be released until final ratification."
