Africa

African states are party to over a thousand investment agreements, the vast majority of which have been signed with non-African countries.

In 2006, Members of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) (Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland) signed the SADC Finance and Investment Protocol that also includes the ISDS mechanism. Only two claims have been registered under these terms, both against Lesotho (but the governments in the region do not typically disclose such information). In 2016 amendments to the protocol were adopted. They eliminated ISDS provisions (only state-to-state arbitration remained) and narrowed the scope of investors’ rights.

In South Africa, shortly after settling a dispute with foreign mining companies over its new post-apartheid mining rules (Piero Foresti & Others case), the government began to withdraw from bilateral investment treaties (BIT) that include ISDS, arguing they belonged to a bygone era. It claimed BITs focus on the interests of investors from developed countries and do not address concerns of developing countries.

The South African government decided to develop a new model BIT and strengthen its domestic legislation in regard to the protection offered to foreign investors, such as compatibility of BIT-type protection with South African law. South Africa also sought to incorporate legitimate exceptions to investor protection where warranted by public interest considerations.

Provisions of South Africa’s new model BIT have been incorporated into SADC’s. This model sets out provisions that mitigate the risks of earlier treaties and leaves open the option for state-to-state dispute settlement in addition to investor-state dispute settlement procedures.

In 2014, voices from the Namibian government cast doubts on the correlation between foreign direct investment and investment treaties including ISDS. They argued that ISDS represented a risk for developing countries, due to important legal fees and awards which can pose a significant budgetary threat. Further, statistics show most claimants come from developed countries.

About 11% of all arbitration disputes have involved African states.

In 2013, an arbitration court ordered Libya to pay US$935 million in a dispute over a land-leasing contract for a tourism project, making it one of the largest known awards to date.

Egypt has been the fifth most targeted state worldwide with 34 registered ISDS cases against it. Tanzania has been the most targeted country in sub-Sahara Africa with six disputes, all of which were initiated by European investors.

Photo: Hansueli Krapf / CC BY-SA 3.0

(April 2020)

Médias24 | 16-Sep-2022
Le Maroc et Carlyle ont trouvé un accord qui réduirait les prétentions du fonds d’investissement américain à 14 millions de dollars contre plus de 400 millions initialement réclamés.
State of Power | 14-Sep-2022
The ECT Secretariat, whose survival depends on continuation of the treaty, continues to lobby these countries to take additional steps towards acceding to the Energy Charter Treaty.
Médias24 | 7-Sep-2022
Le Maroc doit gérer un nouveau litige à haut risque pour les caisses de l’Etat. Une entité espagnole réclame la bagatelle de 407 millions d’euros en réparation.
Lexology | 1-Sep-2022
In recent years, in certain investment arbitration proceedings, States have brought counterclaims alleging that foreign investors had failed to comply with corporate social responsibility principles. In all but two cases, these counterclaims have been unsuccessful.
Ecofin | 24-Aug-2022
La compagnie minière Montero Mining réclame 90 millions de dollars canadiens comme dommages et intérêts en réparation du préjudice causé par l’expropriation du projet de terres rares Wigu Hill en 2018.
Junior Mining Network | 24-Aug-2022
Montero Mining and Exploration Ltd. is seeking compensation of CAD$ 90 million from Tanzania over the expropriation of the Wigu Hill Rare Earth Element Project.
Michigan Journal of International Law | 23-Aug-2022
A recent ICSID tribunal found a developing state liable for breaching the full protection and security obligation due to its inability to protect a foreign investment against terrorist attacks in a remote deserted area.
Yabiladi | 23-Aug-2022
Le CIRDI a rejeté toutes les demandes de la société allemande Scholz Holding qui réclamait plusieurs dizaines de millions d’euros au Maroc.
JDSupra | 22-Jul-2022
The model BIT aims to balance two objectives: the attraction of foreign direct investment to African states and the promotion of sustainable development.
Médias24 | 13-Jul-2022
Impliqué dans cinq affaires au CIRDI, le Maroc risque des condamnations dont le montant global peut dépasser les 23 MMDH.

0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 | ... | 430