About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

52 Tex. Int'l L. J. 313 (2017)
Multilateral Investment Treaties in Africa and the Antagonistic Narratives of Bilateralism and Regionalism

handle is hein.journals/tilj52 and id is 349 raw text is: Multilateral Investment Treaties in Africa and the Antagonistic Narratives of Bilateralism and Regionalism ODYSSEAS G. REPousIS* ABSTRACT In the aftermath of mounting concerns over the legitimacy of international investment law and investor-state arbitration in the middle and late 2000s, African countries sought to project an alternative image of international investment law through hard law instruments. This brought about three multilateral investment treaties: The Protocol on Finance and Investment of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Investment Agreement of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), and the Supplementary Act on Investment of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). These treaties operate on both the multilateral and intra-African levels but are distinct from other mainstream investment treaties inside and outside of Africa in their inclusion of anti-bribery and labor standards as well as other developmental provisions. Furthermore, the SADC Protocol requires the exhaustion of local remedies prior to resorting to investor-state arbitration, and the Supplementary Act of the ECOWAS abandons investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms altogether. However, these multilateral investment law instruments are not the only type of investment treaty that exists among African countries. In fact, African countries have long made use of bilateral investment treaties (BITs), not only with Western, ex-colonial powers (extra- Africa BITs), but also with other African countries (intra-Africa BITs). In addition to these BITs, there have been two prior multilateral investment treaties among African states, modeled after extra-African BITs. Lastly, there have been a series of multilateral investment treaties between Arab and Muslim states to which some African countries are a party. This Article seeks to answer a twofold question. First, how different are the latest African multilateral investment treaties from mainstream investment treaties, and how, if at all, do they manage to establish a new developmental model that is better suited to the African context? And second, if the most recent African multilateral investment treaties truly capture a drastic shift towards Africa-centric investment * LLM (Harvard), PhD candidate (University of Hong Kong). Associate, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart and Sullivan, LLP. London, United Kingdom. Email: odysseasrepousis@quinnemanuel.com. The author thanks Mark Wu for his support and helpful comments. 313

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most