Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 5:33 pm Post subject: Banks foreclosing on nation states! EU/UN 'State Bankruptcy'
UN General Assembly strengthens sovereignty and human rights - global States bankruptcy method from the table
UN General Assembly strengthens sovereignty and human rights - global States bankruptcy method from the table – NWO for many years thrown back !
Bilderberg exposed in Dresden 3. Volker Reusing on EU killing free press & nation state bankruptcy procedure
Volker Reusing, and Prof. Dr. Franz Hörmann (Vienna University of Economics)
On 10.09.2015 has happened a small miracle. The UN General Assembly with the affirmative vote of 136 States principles adopted for the sovereign management of State bankrupt. In Basic Principle no 1 of the Resolution explicitly confirms that each state has the right to decide about his own state of bankruptcy – the Resolution recommends that a state should be disabled, bankrupt of any abusive measures that the rights of creditors should be safeguarded from the beginning, and the state should bankruptcy be the last resort.
Basic Principle no. 9 recommends that the States, collective action clauses (additional conditions for case of bankruptcy) in your state loans, for the case of bankruptcy, the creditors (private and public) all meetings majority decisions, and no public or private creditor of a bankrupt state can escape the outcome of the procedure. This is, together with No. 1; the creditor should make the debtor state, so no political conditions. The Resolution of 10.09.2015 wants a meeting of private and public creditors, which negotiates with the debtor government, and only the Failure of a negotiated solution to the debtor state to decide unilaterally the state of bankruptcy.
Basic Principle no 6 confirmed that state immunity from Jurisdiction and execution with respect to sovereign debt restructuring is a law (of the respective debtor country) to the courts of other States, and that exceptions should be interpreted restrictively.
Of particular importance is the Basic Principle no. 8 of the Resolution is, what the debt sustainability should be measured, so according to what criteria is to be determined, how far debt will be reduced. Inclusive and sustainable economic growth and sustainable development, as well as the stability of the international financial system has also wanted the Resolution dated 09.09.2014. Add to that the respect for human rights, the minimization of economic and social costs, and the preservation of the creditor's rights from the beginning have come here.
On the preparatory work of the IMF and the world Bank for an international insolvency mechanism you want to discuss, according to no. 3 at the end of the Resolution only on the next session of the UN General Assembly. No word on the fact that you wanted to introduce such.
Almost exactly a year earlier, on 09.09.2014, had been decided by the UN General Assembly in Bolivia, which at the time had the presidency of the G 77 countries, introduced a Resolution that was until the next session of the UN General Assembly, i.e. until September 2015, an international Treaty for a global States insolvency proceedings. No more talk on 10.09.2015. On 09/09/2014 no longer wanted to have such a global mechanism nor the IMF and the world Bank, which is now the case. The press release of UNCTAD from the 11.09.2015 to the Resolution of 10.09.2015 suggests that the majority of States no longer wants to involve in the UN General Assembly in the event of a state bankruptcy and the IMF.
The Resolution dated 09.09.2014 was created under the impression of the indignation of many countries that some had described as a "vulture Fund" private-sector creditors, Argentina had not accepted the state bankruptcy of the country, but instead, in the United States (because of the then government bonds, the us had put American law) to the payment of the full par value of at a reduced price acquired old bonds sued and, according to US civil law. Argentina would have these creditors accordingly, compared to other private creditors, up to and incl. In 2014, preferably paid, would the old debt to the old creditors again lives according to the so-called "Rufo clause", which has been applied until 31.12.2014, what would have made Argentina probably bankrupt again.
The Resolution dated 09.09.2014 had demanded that the international state insolvency mechanism should increase the "cost of non-compliance" in favor of the international financial system – more power shift to the benefit of the creditor banks in the event of bankruptcy. And the human rights were not mentioned in the Resolution dated 09.09.2014 not explicitly.
A working group of the UNCTAD was asked on 09/09/2014 with the Work for the draft of an international Treaty for the international States insolvency proceedings. Instead, the design for the on 10.09.2015 Resolution adopted was decided.
We (Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing and Volker Reusing) had us turned together with the Austrian economist Prof. Dr. Franz Hörmann (Vienna University of Economics) with an opinion together on 09.12.2014, among others, the G-77, as well as several UN human rights special Rapporteur on 02.01.2015, inter alia, to UNCTAD. In paragraph 6 of its Resolution dated 05.12.2014 for the implementation of its Resolution dated 09.09.2014, the UN General Assembly had expressly instructed the science to contribute to the Committee (in the case of UNCTAD) for the development of an international state insolvency proceedings.
We have argued that the debtor state should decide on its debt relief, because this is the sovereignty protects the best, and that debt reduction should be done on the scale of the in the debtor country the fundamental rights and human rights, because of their high legal rank, and because of this should lead to a fair and reason - and human rights-compliant compromise. We have explained that, given the current nature of the creation of money from Nothing each Bank is replaceable, that there is no "too big to fail" or "systemic" banks. Furthermore, we have suggested that to avoid humanitarian crises in the State are bankrupt or to terminate, limited to the securing of food, medical care and shelter, and also creation of money of capital. Or to switch directly a other money system such as that of Prof. Dr. Hörmann developed, money to get out of today's credit money system to get out. For unbundling to powerful become banks, we have recommended that the statutory cap on the creation of money per year and per Bank. We have been informed that the "little Treaty change" (art. 136 Abs. 3 tfeu) and of all the mechanisms of the "European financial mechanism" for the Eurozone ("aid to Greece", EFSM, EFSF, and ESM) and the EU economy see government (tightened stability and growth Pact, imbalance procedure, and Budgetary Surveillance), all are committed to the financial stability of the financial sector (mainly the banks and not the currency, the Euro, or of the state finances), and that you are connected with the requirements at the expense of the population with a Strict as in the "practice" and the "modalities" of the IMF (also the conclusions of the EcofinCouncil 09.05.2010, Az. SN 2564/1/10).
In addition, we have shown that the States allow bankruptcy mechanism, the ESM for the Eurozone States, the meeting of the private creditors, the insolvent state policy requirements, and that aims to privatize the public services and the public institutions of the state, what in EU law with the Lisbon Treaty (article 14 tfeu, for services of General interest, article 2 of Protocol 26 for the public institutions) has been installed, but due to the Lisbon judgment of 30.06.2009 only once. You want to enforce for the countries in the Eurozone with the States insolvency procedure of the ESM. And about the TTIP free trade agreement for all of the EU member States (see art. 19 of the TTIP negotiating mandate the EU Commission). The example of the claim of J. P. Morgan Bank in its paper "the Euro area adjustment – about half way there" from 28.05.2013 to the abolition of the national constitutions of the countries of the Euro-zone fundamental rights of workers and of fundamental rights, which allow protests, we have shown that even conditions for the deletion of fundamental rights, in a state threatening bankruptcy proceedings as the ESM.
In view of the intention of the Resolution from 09.09.2014 to the involvement of the IMF, in an international state insolvency proceedings, and to further increase the cost of the "non-compliance", we have shown, with reference especially to Prof. Dr. Michel Chossudovsky's "The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order" (2003, Global Research) and the UNICEF study "Adjustment with a Human Face" (1987), examples from a number of countries, where IMF conditions, nutrition and health systems have hard damaged. According to the Foreword, on p. 12 the Economist and former IMF employee Davison Budhoo in his work, "enough is Enough" (Heinrich-Böll-Foundation, 1991) has been accused of UNICEF, the IMF and the world Bank, with its austerity requirements for the death of up to 7 million children under 5 years, since 1982, been responsible. In addition, we have referred to the report of Prof. Dr. Jean Ziegler (then UN special Rapporteur on the human right to food), 07.02.2001, according to which obligations imposed by the IMF and the world Bank, the main world are obstacle no. 2 for the realization of the Right to food. And we have referred to the Guardian article "The IMF's four steps of damnation" from the 29.04.2001 of the former world Bank chief economist Professor Joseph Stiglitz that the IMF-imposed cuts in social spending are excessively hard, in order to initiate riots and to achieve privatization at lower prices.
Prof. Dr. Hörmann has worked out in his part of the text the crucial contradictions in the concept of a state insolvency procedure. As States, in a democracy, the laws including the bankruptcy law, they cannot be subject to the insolvency law. It is also a Central component of state sovereignty that the States determine the way in their territory, money is created. States are not forced to borrow money, because you can self-define the rules of how money is created. In addition, he has illustrated what it would mean in a state of bankruptcy, if you would see States as the company. Responsible for the Management of the government, and the shareholders of the state would then be in the first line, when it should be. If you would see the population as Employees of the state, it would have to be on the creditors ' side, rather than for the debt of the state to pay. If you wanted to see the population, however, as the owner of the state, then their liability as Participants of a partnership or a Corporation would only be considered if the population does not have appropriate rights in the state, which is not the case. In addition, Prof. Dr. Hörmann has explained how, today, the money out of Nothing is created, namely through the lending of the banks. The Bank Bay "claim" (for the repayment of the loan) to "liability" (to the payment of the loan) and the repayment of the money (the liability of the Bank will be destroyed by the reverse of the booking record to anyone other than a Bank). The interest and fees the banks but must be provided by benefits for the real economy. As an Alternative, Prof., Dr. Hörmann is the Positive Money (where the money from the state drawn on capital, and taxation is destroyed), and he developed the information money (where the money is destroyed with each payment transaction to the Payer and the recipient of the payment is drawn) will be presented. The information money allows for asymmetric prices on the appropriate legal basis, so that the amount does not have to match with the destroyed. Both of the Alternatives allow the creation of money without the need to fault someone. In addition, he explains how to use the information with monetary incentives for a more on cooperation instead of competition, building a real economy, so as to provide a better guarantee of social rights and greater equality.
On 10.09.2015 136 States have made a wise decision, in particular, to the strengthening of the state sovereignty. The dream of the NWO from the extensive de-facto reign of the sovereign institutions of the States is moved to countries outside the EU in larger distance. The respect of human rights, it has now been decided, after all, as one of seven standards for debt sustainability. Caution here does not mean to violate the human rights of its creditors and residents of the debtor country, in the protection or safeguarding of human rights when dealing with the bankruptcy, the Resolution has not demanded from 10.09.2015 explicitly.
The triggering of a new global sovereign debt crisis that many had expected due to an expected increase in the US interest rates (which would have led to higher interest on debt in US$ debt-ridden States) that is no longer worth it since 10.09.2015 for the creditors of most of the States. According to the article, the German economic news from the 17.09.2015, the Fed has been decision, the U.S. is not interest rates but increase, a reaction to "nervous financial markets", the international economy, the un put on the development on the financial markets in their decisions. We suspect that here, di Resolution played by 10.09.2015 a crucial role. Because in at least 136 countries, if not in all countries outside of the EU, creditors now expect the respective debtor to state his bankrupt self-confidently handled without the IMF, without disproportionate interference in the social human rights of its inhabitants, and without the clearance of the regulatory institutions (in view of the confirmation of the sovereign immunity of States in respect of enforcement in no. 6 of the Resolution of 10.09.2015). As long as the Resolution of the UN General Assembly is 10.09.2015 in the consciousness of the States that have decided this, you need to expect the creditors and so in order to get much less in the case of a national bankruptcy, than would previously have been the case. And the more States, if you become bankrupt, the Resolution of 10.09.2015 apply, the more likely their content will reach the Status of "ius cogens" (peremptory international law), what are the major private creditors are not the slightest interest.
For all the joy over the strengthening of sovereignty and human rights for the majority of States is now to be expected, however, that the Lobbies, which want to enforce the privatisation of public services and public institutions, are now increasingly the States of the EU and especially the Eurozone, as well as in addition the States with which the EU makes the free trade agreements, targeted.
The UN-Resolution dated 09.09.2014, which had requested (no. 5), that is, until the next regular session of the UN General Assembly (this year in September) an international framework (i.e. an international Treaty) for a state insolvency procedure should be http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/68/304
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
