Stand-Alone Posts

In this brief post, I want to make sense of Prabhash Ranjan’s brief critique of TWAIL perspectives on international investment law. My main aim is not to mount a defense of TWAIL project(s) on investment law because that might be done more eloquently by others. Instead, I want to make some brief comments about the political valence of, and the assumptions behind, the reservations that Professor Ranjan articulated in this post, and which also appear in his recent book on India and Bilateral Investment Treaties.

It is trite to mention that the benefits and costs from trade expansion may never be evenly distributed across ACs. However, the estimated revenue loss should not be considered as an absolute loss for ACs as the long-term benefits, facilitated by adjustment support remain significant. It will allow comparative advantage to thrive, thereby granting customers and firms access to cheaper products/raw materials in the continent.

States could rely on secondary rules on State responsibility to defend preventative measures relating to COVID-19, yet their successful invocation depends on satisfying several conditions set out in the ILC’s Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, a discussion of which is beyond the scope of this post. Meanwhile, the applicability of the doctrine of margin of appreciation, developed by the European Court of Human Rights, to the claims arising under BITs has been accepted, justifying why investment tribunals should pay deference to governmental judgments of national requirements in the protection of public health when the “discretionary exercise of sovereign power, [is] not made irrationally and not exercised in bad faith”

This special issue of the International Criminal Law Review particularly welcomes submissions that critically reflect on these questions in the context of transitional justice and resurgent authoritarianism and ongoing conflict.

The American University in Cairo (AUC) and the Department of Law in the School of Global Affairs and Public Policy (GAPP) invite applications for a one-year visiting position at the Assistant, Associate, or Full Professor level, beginning Fall 2020.

Since Kenya had made commitments, it is not far fetched to argue that non observance of these commitments especially regarding trade in legal services offends the EAC Treaty. This brings in the issue of remedies available at the East African Court of Justice. It is time this issue was addressed by the  East African Court of Justice (EACJ).

In light of the evolving situation regarding the COVID-19 crisis, the SIEL Executive Council has decided to postpone the 2020 SIEL Conference, which was scheduled to take place in July 2020 at Bocconi University in Milan.

Joining the WTO will reduce the diverse economy that the Ethiopian government has been fostering. But if the government feels that WTO membership is necessary, then Ethiopia must take it’s time to negotiate more favorable terms in line with its development status and objectives. In particular, Ethiopia should not make the same mistakes as other newly joined nations and should not agree to undertake higher levels of commitments than is made absolutely necessary by the WTO rules and what other founding LDCs, such as Bangladesh, have made. Specifically, Ethiopia should seek to ensure that tariffs are bound at the highest rates possible.

There is a new struggle for Africa’s market. The contestants include the European Union (EU), United States (US), Russia, India and China. In this blog, I reflect on the new European Union -Africa Comprehensive Strategy proposals. The blog pushes against the Strategy’s revision of the historical relationship between the two regions which is built on embedded inequality. This is because, to be a true partnership, the unequal nature of the relationship between the EU and Africa must be centered. In the contest for its market, Africa has a unique opportunity to harness the competition tactically.

One group of women should be celebrated for their contributions to shaping the emancipation narratives and processes on the continent. This is the group of African female scholars such as Professor Celestine Nyamu-Musembi, Professor Sylvia Tamale, Professor Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Professor Ambreena Manji and Professor Sylvia Kang’ara. The perspectives of these scholars play a crucial role in shaping interventions targeted at women in Africa. As the English saying goes, only the wearer of the shoe knows where it pinches. International organizations seeking to emancipate women must pay close attention to the scholarship of these women. Their rich body of scholarship provides useful insights that intervention documents drawn up in the development cities of Geneva and New York may lack.