While European political circles continue to fight over an increasingly vanishing power, in the face of increasingly powerful markets, the only EU institution that can still influence reality, the Central Bank, is not under the control of any democratic institutions, for lack of a federal government of the eurozone.
More generally, across the world, markets are gradually implementing, under their sole control, the institutions necessary to respect the only right that is of relevance to them: property right.
Thus arise, in the financial and commercial world, very many watchdog bodies, which are initially given red carpet treatment by national parliaments before taking their autonomy, because they are transnational, and which consider state authorities only as instruments at their disposal.
This is in particular the case of ACTA (Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement), trade agreement under highly confidential negotiation since October 2007 among some developed country governments, including France. Refused by the Chinese, Brazilians and Indians, its application in Europe can only be stopped by a vote of the European Parliament, which national parliaments shall confirm. Under the guise of organizing the global fight against counterfeiting, protecting the rights holders and brands, ACTA actually accelerates the development of a generalized surveillance of consumers and citizens, turning States into an auxiliary police servicing big companies.
In particular, generalizing in the whole world the principles of the American laws SOPA and PIPA and going far beyond Hadopi, ACTA considers all interactions on the internet as a threat as serious as counterfeit. It obliges signatory States to impose criminal sanctions on access and technology providers that would refuse to monitor and censor online communications; its Article 27 has even authorized the taking of « swift action to prevent future infringements » without going through the judge and it hands over to non-state players to pursue police missions (monitoring and collection of evidence) and justice missions (sanctions); this same article, which deals with « means of mass distribution of counterfeit » would even prohibit blogging platforms, P2P networks and free software. Finally, more incredible, Article 23 would authorize a signatory country to impose criminal penalties on free activities, because they should be exercised, according to ACTA, only on a « commercial scale »: thus we might be required to pay for sending emails or for sharing files between individuals.
The remainder of the agreement is in the amendment, it could lead in particular to consider generic drugs as counterfeit, the effect of this would be the ban of their use.
Finally, and perhaps the worst: once ratified by the Parliaments, the agreement will escape democratic control. Article 36 creates in fact an obscure « ACTA Committee » which, under Article 42, would have as mission to enforce the agreement by non-signatory countries, and would even be allowed to modify the contents, without the control of national parliaments!
It is therefore essential to oppose the signing of ACTA, so that the urgent implementation of a global rule of law does not sign the death warrant of democracy, but instead organizes development on a global scale.