Washington, DC — Former Ecuadorian officials, prominent international jurists, and former UN experts have warned that a planned Ecuador-UAE Bilateral Investment Treaty would reintegrate Ecuador into the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, which allows foreign corporations to sue governments for lost “future profits” over pro-environment, pro-labor, consumer safety, or other public interest regulations. Ecuador’s constitution prohibits ISDS, and voters have rejected the lifting of this prohibition in two referendums. In a letter sent this week to UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, 26 former Ecuadorian ministers, and other senior public officials urged the United Arab Emirates not to ratify the treaty. Their letter follows a similar appeal from international jurists and legal experts to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court.

“Investment agreements are strongest when they rest on a clear and stable legal foundation,” said CEPR Senior Research Fellow Guillaume Long, a former Ecuadorian foreign minister and signatory of the letter to the UAE. “Former high-level government officials and international jurists are raising concerns about the durability of an agreement that is inconsistent with the Ecuadorian Constitution and with popular will as expressed through democratic processes.”

In the new letter, Ecuadorian former high-level governmental officials argue that the Ecuador-UAE treaty rests on a constitutionally contested foundation and could face future legal challenges. In addition to Long, the signatories include former foreign ministers Ricardo Patiño and María Isabel Salvador; former National Assembly presidents Fernando Cordero, Gabriela Rivadeneira, and Viviana Veloz; former finance ministers Carlos de la Torre and Fausto Herrera; and former Minister of Knowledge and Human Talent Andrés Arauz, among others. They warn that legal uncertainty does not provide a stable basis for long-term investment relations and argue that Ecuador and the UAE can continue to deepen economic cooperation without investor-state arbitration.

This letter follows an earlier letter sent to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court on June 10 by 16 prominent international jurists, former judges, former UN special rapporteurs, and former human rights officials. The signatories argued that the Court’s March 2026 ruling approving the Ecuador-UAE treaty effectively restores ISDS despite Article 422 of Ecuador’s Constitution, the Court’s own 2023 ruling against similar provisions in the Ecuador-Costa Rica trade agreement, and the April 2024 referendum in which nearly 65 percent of voters rejected a constitutional amendment that would have permitted investor-state arbitration.

Signatories include former Inter-American Court of Human Rights judges Raúl Zaffaroni and Patricio Pazmiño, former Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón, former Colombian Constitutional Court judge and prosecutor general Luis Eduardo Montealegre, and former UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights Olivier De Schutter. Their letter argues that the Court is obtaining through judicial interpretation a result that could not be achieved through constitutional reform or a popular vote. The signatories also express concern about the broader context surrounding the ruling, including questions regarding judicial independence and acknowledged contacts between actors linked to the executive branch and sitting judges while the case was under deliberation.

The letters come amid growing international push back against ISDS. Earlier this year, Colombian President Gustavo Petro announced that Colombia would pursue withdrawal from the system. ISDS was also a central topic of discussion at the Bogotá conference “Economía para la Vida” and at the First International Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, where governments, academics, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders raised concerns about the impact of investor-state arbitration on democratic decision-making, climate policy, and governments’ ability to regulate in the public interest.

“This debate is taking place internationally, not only in Ecuador,” said CEPR Research Fellow Mario Osorio. “Governments are increasingly examining whether investor-state arbitration serves the public interest or constrains their ability to adopt policies that reflect democratic priorities. Ecuadorian citizens have repeatedly chosen to maintain constitutional limits on ISDS. Respecting those decisions is essential to the legitimacy and long-term stability of any investment.”

###