Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria

There has been a backlash against the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system in recent times. Amongst other complaints, critics have argued that the ISDS whittles down the regulatory powers of states in favour of private adjudicators. These criticisms are premised on the fact that unlike co...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Aluko, Adebowale
Other Authors: Bosman, Lise
Format: Dissertation
Language:English
Published: Faculty of Law 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33622
id ndltd-netd.ac.za-oai-union.ndltd.org-uct-oai-localhost-11427-33622
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-netd.ac.za-oai-union.ndltd.org-uct-oai-localhost-11427-336222021-07-22T05:09:11Z Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria Aluko, Adebowale Bosman, Lise Adams, Faadhil Commercial Law There has been a backlash against the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system in recent times. Amongst other complaints, critics have argued that the ISDS whittles down the regulatory powers of states in favour of private adjudicators. These criticisms are premised on the fact that unlike commercial arbitration, investment arbitration awards may have far reaching effects on states. In response to these concerns, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III and other similar bodies have been tasked to carry out reforms to address some of these issues. In spite of ongoing reforms, criticisms have continued with some countries abandoning the investor-state arbitration mechanism altogether. In Nigeria, the state of crisis in the judiciary has necessitated the need for a viable alternative to litigation. The ISDS framework therefore remains the preferrable option for the resolution of investment disputes. There have been recent attempts to amend the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 11 of 1988. Also, the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission recently announced plans to reform the country's investment law framework. It is in the light of these developments that this research has been undertaken to examine the flaws in Nigeria's investment arbitration framework and reforms that may be introduced to address them. In making a case for the retention of the ISDS framework in Nigeria, this study critiques Nigeria's investment arbitration framework and explores a number of recommendations towards addressing current challenges. It is argued that the proposed solutions will improve the effectiveness of Nigeria's investment arbitration framework especially with respect to the legal framework for the consent of the Nigerian government to ICSID arbitration and in the area of court assisted measures and post-arbitral award litigation. 2021-07-20T07:31:37Z 2021-07-20T07:31:37Z 2021_ 2021-07-15T09:10:19Z Master Thesis Masters LLM http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33622 eng application/pdf Faculty of Law Department of Commercial Law
collection NDLTD
language English
format Dissertation
sources NDLTD
topic Commercial Law
spellingShingle Commercial Law
Aluko, Adebowale
Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
description There has been a backlash against the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system in recent times. Amongst other complaints, critics have argued that the ISDS whittles down the regulatory powers of states in favour of private adjudicators. These criticisms are premised on the fact that unlike commercial arbitration, investment arbitration awards may have far reaching effects on states. In response to these concerns, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III and other similar bodies have been tasked to carry out reforms to address some of these issues. In spite of ongoing reforms, criticisms have continued with some countries abandoning the investor-state arbitration mechanism altogether. In Nigeria, the state of crisis in the judiciary has necessitated the need for a viable alternative to litigation. The ISDS framework therefore remains the preferrable option for the resolution of investment disputes. There have been recent attempts to amend the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 11 of 1988. Also, the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission recently announced plans to reform the country's investment law framework. It is in the light of these developments that this research has been undertaken to examine the flaws in Nigeria's investment arbitration framework and reforms that may be introduced to address them. In making a case for the retention of the ISDS framework in Nigeria, this study critiques Nigeria's investment arbitration framework and explores a number of recommendations towards addressing current challenges. It is argued that the proposed solutions will improve the effectiveness of Nigeria's investment arbitration framework especially with respect to the legal framework for the consent of the Nigerian government to ICSID arbitration and in the area of court assisted measures and post-arbitral award litigation.
author2 Bosman, Lise
author_facet Bosman, Lise
Aluko, Adebowale
author Aluko, Adebowale
author_sort Aluko, Adebowale
title Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
title_short Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
title_full Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
title_fullStr Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
title_full_unstemmed Towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in Nigeria
title_sort towards a more effective legal framework for investor-state arbitration in nigeria
publisher Faculty of Law
publishDate 2021
url http://hdl.handle.net/11427/33622
work_keys_str_mv AT alukoadebowale towardsamoreeffectivelegalframeworkforinvestorstatearbitrationinnigeria
_version_ 1719417491449446400