bilaterals.org logo
bilaterals.org logo

RCEP

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a “mega-regional” trade agreement that was signed in November 2020. It had been negotiated since 2012 between the 10 ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Nations) governments and their six FTA partners: Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. But in November 2019, India decided not to join the treaty. The eight years of RCEP negotiations were shrouded in secrecy. Social movements could only rely on leaks to analyse the proposed agreement.

RCEP is largely driven by ASEAN. Indeed, the project originated in, and expands upon, the stitching together of five existing ASEAN+1 trade agreements that ASEAN signed with Japan, South Korea, China, India, Australia and New Zealand. The stated goal of the negotiations was to “boost economic growth and equitable economic development, advance economic cooperation and broaden and deepen integration in the region through the RCEP,” according to the ASEAN website. RCEP covers almost every aspect of economy such as goods, services, investment, economic and technical cooperation, intellectual property rights (IPR), rules of origin, competition and dispute settlement.

Throughout the negotiations, concerns about the RCEP were voiced in a number of contexts and concern a range of issues. A 2015 leaked text on intellectual property rights proposed by Japan’s negotiators confirmed concerns that the deal could go beyond the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Various movements and organisations, including environmental groups, trade unions, domestic workers, farmers, hawkers, women groups, and people living with HIV have raised their concerns throughout the negotiations and the current ratification process. Thousands of people marched against the trade deal’s harmful provisions, demanding transparency from governments, in Hyderabad, India, in July 2017, and organised a People’s Convention on RCEP.

In 2019, public pressure forced India to pull out of the negotiations. Several harmful provisions were dropped too, such as the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows corporations to sue states before arbitration courts over lost expected profits, and mandatory UPOV91 membership. UPOV is a specialised system of seed patenting, which makes it illegal – in fact, a criminal offence — for farmers to save and reuse protected seeds.

The final text shows that there are no increases in patent monopolies for medicines above the WTO standard of 20 years, advocated by pharmaceutical companies and pushed by Japan and South Korea early in the negotiations, which could have delayed the availability of generic forms of medicines, especially in low income countries, and would have been very damaging in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The electronic commerce chapter left out some of the most dire rules pushed by Big Tech, and present in other trade deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and is not enforceable.

However the RCEP will worsen the balance of trade of almost all of its member countries, especially ‘developing’ and ‘less developed’ countries, according to a UNCTAD assessment. This can potentially increase the pressure to privatise essential public services, all the more so since such services are, under the deal, governed by international “trade rules” that suit corporations and limit states’ ability to regulate them in the public interest. The same rules that remove barriers to foreign investment can also apply to the agriculture sector, and increase the trend of land grabbing.

A joint statement by seven trade union federations in the Asia-Pacific said that the RCEP would result in the deterioration of working conditions in a race to the bottom under heightened competition, in which migrant workers face the worst consequences. They added that: “instead of furthering a free trade project, countries should be collaborating on reviving their economies and expanding public goods.”

China, Singapore and Thailand were the first countries to ratify the agreement at the beginning of 2021. In order to enter into force, RCEP needs to be ratified by six ASEAN countries and three non-ASEAN countries.

See the full text here

Last update: April 2021 / Photo: bilaterals.org


RCEP: Between geopolitics and geo-economics
With RCEP coming into play on January 1, the divergences that started way back in 2013 will reach a tipping point.
World’s largest free trade agreement RCEP kicks in, cutting tariffs for 92% of goods traded among parties
The world’s largest trade pact kicked in on Saturday (Jan 1), cutting tariffs for businesses for about 92 per cent of goods traded among signatory parties that have ratified the agreement.
The Minister of Trade ensures that RCEP and IK-CEPA are effective January 1, 2022
The Minister of Trade (Minister of Trade) Muhammad Lutfi confirmed that the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) will take effect January 1, 2022.
Farmers urged senators to junk RCEP
A group of farmers has threatened not to support re-electionist senators if they will not junk the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a mega trade deal.
RCEP: Weighing the good, bad in world’s biggest free trade pact
A group of farmers, fishers, civil society organizations, and the private sector has expressed opposition to the ratification of the world’s largest free trade agreement—the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
Proposed amendments needed for RCEP ratification to be tabled in Parliament next month, says Azmin
The proposed amendments to three Acts, which are necessary to complete the domestic ratification process of the RCEP, will be tabled in Parliament next month, according to Senior Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali.
Vietnam puts high hopes on RCEP trade deal
From Vietnam’s perspective, participation in RCEP brings both pros and cons. While the prospect of increasing exports, there are concerns over how the agreement will affect the domestic market.
Reject the RCEP trade agreement
The RCEP agreement was finalized without consulting agri-fisheries stakeholders, many of whom are directly affected by the treaty’s trade rules and concessions
Agriculture interest groups declare opposition to RCEP
Farmers, nongovernment organizations, and some members of the private sector said they oppose the ratification of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trade agreement.
New Asia-Pacific free trade deal harmful to PH food producers, groups say
The country’s agricultural groups urged the government to step on the brakes and review the condition of the farm sector before signing up to a new Asia-Pacific free trade deal that will worsen the already dire state of domestic food producers.

    Links


  • AFTINET RCEP page
    Australia Fair Trade and Investment Network’s campaign page on RCEP
  • MSF RCEP page
    Medecins Sans Frontiere’s access to medecine campaign page on RCEP
  • NO RCEP regional week of action
    Facebook page maintained by the Asia-Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development for the regional week of action against the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, 10-15 October 2016.
  • RCEP Legal
    Legal documents and analyses relating to the Regional Economic Comprehensive Partnership (RCEP)