Recent Developments in the Regulation of Investor-State Dispute Resolution: Any Lessons for the Southern African Development Community?

In: African Journal of Legal Studies
Lawrence Ngobeni University of South Africa

Search for other papers by Lawrence Ngobeni in
Current site
Google Scholar
Babatunde Fagbayibo University of South Africa

Search for other papers by Babatunde Fagbayibo in
Current site
Google Scholar
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):



In 2016, the Southern African Development Community (SADC) amended Annex 1 of the SADC Protocol on Finance and Investment (FIP) in order to remove investor access to international arbitration or Investor-State Dispute Resolution (ISDS). The recent formation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the COMESA-EAC-SADC Tripartite Free Trade Agreement (T-FTA) are factors that will likely curtail SADC’s ability to regulate foreign investments. Both AfCFTA and T-FTA are supposed to have their own investment protocols. This means that SADC faces the loss of regulatory authority over foreign investments. The recent formation of the Pan African Investment Code (PAIC) has shown that some African Union (AU) Member States want to provide ISDS for their investors, while others including SADC Members States do not. This article intends to evaluate the lessons SADC can learn from other jurisdictions in terms of the effective regulation of ISDS.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 331 106 11
Full Text Views 290 7 0
PDF Views & Downloads 809 19 0