Energy Charter Treaty

The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is a plurilateral investment agreement between 53 European and Central Asian countries. It was signed in 1994 and entered into force in April 1998.

About 30 countries around the world are at different stages of joining the ECT. Burundi, Eswatini (formerly Swaziland) and Mauritania are first in line, followed by Pakistan and Uganda.

The original objective of the ECT was to overcome the political and economic divisions between Eastern and Western Europe after the demise of the Soviet Union, as well as to strengthen Europe’s energy security. European countries wanted to secure the access to fossil fuel resources of the former Soviet countries by protecting foreign energy investments in these countries.

The ECT provides for an Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism to resolve disputes between an investor and a member state. To this day, it is the world’s most widely used legal instrument for initiating ISDS arbitrations. It has been invoked by investors in 124 cases.

Critics argue that as with most other investment agreements, it places investors’ economic rights and interests over the social, ecological and economic interests of host states and their societies. The ECT imposes obligations on the host state but not on foreign investors. The ECT has also been condemned by environmental activists for protecting the fossil fuel industry and undermining serious climate action.

Spain has been subject to 45 arbitration disputes under the ECT after it implemented a series of energy reforms affecting the renewables sector, including a reduction in subsidies for producers. While some cases are still pending, Spain has already been ordered to pay over €800 million.

You can find out more about the Energy Charter Treaty on the ECT’s dirty secrets website.

Key cases include:

Vattenfall (Sweden) vs. Germany: In 2007 the Swedish energy corporation was granted a provisional permit to build a coal-fired power plant near the city of Hamburg. In an effort to protect the Elbe river from the waste waters dumped from the plant, environmental restrictions were added before the final approval of its construction. The investor initiated a dispute, arguing it would make the project unviable. The case was ultimately settled in 2011, with the city of Hamburg agreeing to the lowering of environmental standards.

Yukos (Isle of Man) vs. Russia: Yukos was a Russian oil and gas company. It was acquired from the Russian government during the controversial “loans for shares” auctions of the mid 1990s, whereby some of the largest state industrial assets were leased (in effect privatized) through auctions for money lent by commercial banks to the government. The auctions were rigged and lacked competition, and effectively became a form of selling for a very low price. In 2003, the Yukos CEO was arrested on charges of fraud and tax evasion and the following year Yukos’ assets were frozen or confiscated. In 2007 Yukos’ former shareholders filed a claim for over US$100 billion, seeking compensation for their expropriation. The dispute resulted in 2014 in the arbitrators awarding the majority shareholders over US$50 billion in damages. The investors have been trying to enforce the award in several countries since then.

NextEra (Netherland) vs. Spain: The Dutch investor filed for arbitration in May 2014, after Spain changed the regulatory framework applicable to its investment, namely the construction of two solar power plants. NextEra claimed that Spain abolished the long-term premium and tariff system, negatively affecting the profitability of the project. However, Spain alleged that NextEra should have been aware that changes could be made to the regulatory regime. In May 2019, the investor was awarded around €290 million. Spain filed for annulment in October 2019.

Photo: Marc Maes / Twitter

Last update: April 2020

Bourse Direct | 6-Mar-2021
Les entreprises se sont engagées à retirer toutes les procédures judiciaires en cours, dont le groupe Vattenfall devant un tribunal arbitral de la Banque mondiale.
Reuters | 6-Mar-2021
Vattenfall will get 1.606 billion euros and agreed to end pursuing a separate damages claim in the World Bank’s ICSID arbitration tribunal.
CIAR Global | 5-Mar-2021
El Abogado General de la Unión Europea Maciej Szpunar concluyó el 3 de marzo de 2021 que el arbitraje del Tratado de la Carta de la Energía (TCE) intracomunitario es incompatible con el Derecho de la Unión tomando como base la sentencia Achmea, y plantea que las disputas pueden confiarse a los tribunales nacionales de los Estados miembros.
CAN Europe | 5-Mar-2021
In his opinion on March 3, the Advocate General shed some light on this question by arguing that ISDS in intra-EU disputes is indeed not allowed under EU law.
Investigate Europe | 3-Mar-2021
It is highly questionable whether there will be a new or revised treaty in two years that will protect the climate instead of endangering it.
L’Humanité | 3-Mar-2021
Plus de 750 000 personnes ont signé en une seule semaine la pétition européenne appelant l’Union européenne et les Etats-membres de l’UE à se retirer du Traité sur la charte de l’énergie.
Investigate Europe | 23-Feb-2021
Joining the Energy Charter Treaty is not in the public interest, according to South Africa’s government. It has also cancelled other agreements that allowed foreign investors to sue their state. This has not stopped investors from coming, says Mustaqeem de Gama.
CEO | 23-Feb-2021
Sign the petition to pull out of the Energy Charter Treaty and stop its expansion to other countries!
EU Observer | 23-Feb-2021
The treaty enables companies to claim billions in compensation from states in front of international arbitration tribunals, if they feel unfairly treated by the states’ energy or climate policies.
Basta! | 23-Feb-2021
Un accord international méconnu, le Traité sur la charte de l’énergie, pourrait détruire les efforts des pays européens pour atteindre leurs objectifs climatiques. Face aux industries de l’énergie, ONG et parlementaires tentent d’alerter sur cette menace.