Christian Aid is calling on the British Government to push for a comprehensive review of "serious, damaging flaws" in trade agreements it said had been "forced upon" a number of developing countries in recent weeks by the European Union.
The UK must also take the lead in challenging the way the European Commission negotiates such deals, known as economic partnership agreements (EPAs), to ensure further damaging commitments are avoided, said the organisation.
"Countries were pressurised to agree the deals by threats that they would otherwise face stiff tariffs when accessing European markets," says Tzvetelina Arsova, Christian Aid's Africa economic policy officer.
"The picture that is emerging from the deals is deeply troubling. There are serious, damaging flaws that place major obstacles in the path of economic development for poorer countries."
She went on to chide the UK Government over doing "little to rein in the EC's behaviour" despite raising major objections to the way in which the EC was pursuing the EPAs nearly three years ago.
"As a result, EU mercantilist interests have replaced development aspirations and objectives," said Arsova. "In order to redeem itself, the UK Government must now show leadership in demanding a fundamental review of the deals signed. As they stand, poor countries will simply get poorer."
Christian said that nearly 80 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries had been put under enormous pressure to sign EPAs to replace trade deals dating back to the colonial era that are not in accordance with World Trade Organisation rules.
The "frenetic haste, intense pressure and lack of proper scrutiny of negotiations in a number of parts of the world meant that countries were not able to assess, let alone defend, what would be best for their future development," the agency added.
Caribbean countries signed up en bloc to comprehensive agreements covering not just trade, but investment and the provision of services. A number of African and Pacific countries refused to sign, saying they needed more time to negotiate, while others have signed interim deals covering trade only.
