The appeals, posted on electronic bulletin boards, is receiving more adherents.

In the joint statement and letter, the NGOs, who have been active in the campaign against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, have noted that the MAI talks in the OECD have been `temporarily stalled' because of strong public protests in many OECD countries as well as objections from developing-country groups and governments.

Objections from the public include that the MAI would grant new unprecedented rights to corporations (whilst removing the authority of states to place obligations or regulations on them), threaten national sovereignty and the viability of domestic firms andfarms, remove conditions for development in the South and magnify environmental and social problems.

`Since there is no sign that OECD governments are willing to consider a basic change in the premises and framework of the MAI, we call for the termination of the negotiations and the treaty in the OECD,' the NGOs say.

`We are very concerned,' they add, `by the moves of some OECD governments, including the European Union, to move the MAI process to the World Trade Organisation (WTO). some of them claim this will make it fairer for developing countries and, moreover, environmental and labour concerns will be taken care o in the WTO.

`We reject these claims. Instead, shifting the investment issue to the WTO will place great pressure on developing countries to negotiate and eventually join an agreement that would have disastrous effects on their development prospects.

`Moreover, promises to include environmental and social concerns are likely to be only an eyewash to co-opt the public to accept the basictenets of the MAI. The strong enforcement capability of the WTO through its dispute settlement system will also mean that all countries, especially developing countries, will be forced to comply.

`Domestic laws and policies in a wide range of issues will have to be changed, even if these were to cause job losses, closure of local enterprises and farms, financial instability, balance of payments deficits and environmental deterioration.

`We therefore call on all governments, OECD and non-OECD alike, to reject any proposal to negotiate an investment agreement in the WTO. The trade and investment working group in the WTO should be confined to only study the trade and investment relationships and should not be "upgraded" into a negotiation forum for an investment agreement.

`The proposals by the EU and other major countries to start a "Millennium Round" or a "comprehensive future agenda" for the WTO should not be used as a device to sneak in an investment negotiation process in the WTO.

`On principle, weare against the kind of assumptions and framework that the MAI represents. As public knowledge on the MAI increases, many more people are rejecting this approach. We call on governments, international agencies and NGOs not to accept the MAI or a similar investment approach as inevitable or a "given" but instead to choose a basically different approach in dealing with the investment issue.

`Towards this alternative approach, we call for global and national guidelines, rules and regulations to place obligations on investors and corporations so that their activities and products serve the needs of people within a framework of internationally fair, socially just and environmentally sound development.'

Third World Network Features.