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)

CDR | 3-Jan-2025
The company has secured up to USD 11 million in funding against the North African state.
Médias24 | 3-Jan-2025
La compagnie minière Emmerson a informé avoir sécurisé un financement pouvant atteindre11 millions de dollars grâce à un accord avec un fonds spécialisé dans le financement des litiges.
Nawaat | 2-Jan-2025
L’affaire de la Banque franco-tunisienne connaît un énième rebondissement opposant son actionnaire majoritaire, la société ABCI Investments Limited, à l’Etat tunisien, qui la lui a confisquée.
Investing.com | 2-Jan-2025
In a significant legal development, Zenith Energy Ltd. announced that the ICSID has rejected a request for bifurcation by the Republic of Tunisia in an ongoing arbitration case.
African Manager | 2-Jan-2025
Le montant réclamé dans le cadre de l’arbitrage CIRDI, déterminé par un panel d’experts internationaux en matière de quantum désignés par la société, s’élève à un montant total en principal de 503 millions de dollars américains.
Ecofin | 13-Dec-2024
Le différend entre Sarama et le Burkina Faso a commencé en 2023 avec le retrait d’un permis d’exploration contrôlé depuis 12 ans par la société canadienne.
Sarama | 13-Dec-2024
Formal commencement of international arbitration proceedings for significant damages claim.
SOMO | 11-Dec-2024
The Entebbe Declaration calls for justice and sustainability in global investment governance.
Barlamane.com | 11-Dec-2024
Le Maroc a entrepris des démarches soutenues pour obtenir l’annulation définitive d’une sentence arbitrale de 150 millions de dollars en faveur de Corral Morocco Holdings AB, l’actionnaire suédois majoritaire de la raffinerie SAMIR.
MSN | 9-Dec-2024
The company announced on its intention to file a case with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes following a setback related to the environmental assessment.