Host States’ Monetary Sovereignty Within the Construct of Bilateral Investment Treaties

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Adaeze Agatha Aniodoh
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Financial Crises ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Policy Space ◽  
The Public ◽  
Monetary Transfer ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Affect States

Abstract This article considers assertions of the diminution of the monetary sovereignty of host states when they sign bilateral investment treaties. It discusses monetary transfer provisions in the model BITs of South Africa and Egypt and how their construction can affect states’ rights to regulatory autonomy in mitigating financial crises. This has become imperative in light of recent discussions on the possibilities for a systemic overhaul of BIT provisions, by pushing back against the diminution of host states’ sovereignty in order to respond to the force of globalization. Achieving this would require reform of existing model BITs to introduce appropriate exceptions in order to ensure policy space to protect the public interest.

Fair and Equitable Treatment in Saudi Bilateral Investment Treaties

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-204
Author(s):  
Sarah Alshahrani
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
Police Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
Host State ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Investment Treaties ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Abstract Fair and equitable treatment (FET) is one of the general principles included in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and it is as important as the expropriation clause. Recent investment tribunal practice has shown that FET is one of the most frequently invoked provisions. All Saudi BITs include an old version of the FET clause. However, the vagueness and ambiguity of FET can hold the country liable when it enacts measures in the public interest, and, therefore, a thorough analysis of the best formulation of FET is necessary in order to achieve predictability and certainty for both the investor and the host state, in addition to the need to widen the police power of host states.

scholarly journals Regulating Private Higher Education in South Africa

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chika Sehoole
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Financial Crises ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Private Higher Education ◽  
Private Companies ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
Laws And Policies ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis

This article makes case of how South Africa has been able to use its laws and policies to achieve its objectives of regulating private higher education. This happened in the context of an ascendancy of neo-liberal policies which favoured deregulation and the rolling back of the state. Through these policies the government was able to protect the public even during the global financial crisis as it had registered credible and financially sound institutions which could weather off the financial crises which affected many private companies worldwide.

Posthumous control of copyright, its limitations and the public interest

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-62
Author(s):  
Desmond Osaretin Oriakhogba ◽  
Gloria Kanwulia Adeola-Adedipe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Options ◽  
The Public ◽  
And Control ◽  
Desk Research ◽  
Shed Light

Conducted as a desk research, this paper examines the interface between copyright and succession laws, the notion of testamentary freedom, its limitations and justification for its restriction. The paper draws on this examination to discuss the freedom of authors to dispose their copyright under testate and intestate arrangements, and posthumously control the use of their works under the Nigerian Copyright Act. Following this discussion, the paper identifies and examines the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act that can limit the capacity of authors to posthumously control the use of their works in Nigeria. The paper contends that authors’ liberty to transfer their copyright by testamentary disposition or operation of law, and control the use of their works posthumously, without public interest friendly limitations, can create an imbalance within the copyright system. This paper addresses the issues of whether public interest objectives may be achieved through the limitation in the extant Copyright Act, especially given the propensity for copyright misuse by authors in death, as well as during their lifetime, and what policy options may align the public interest with authors’ posthumous control of copyright. In resolving these questions, the paper draws on instances of copyright misuse in the United States of America (USA) and South Africa and situates them within the Nigerian context to shed light on the issues discussed.

Disintegration and Change in the International Law on Foreign Investment

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 413-429
Author(s):  
Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Investment Treaties

Abstract Resistance to the law made through expansionist interpretation of investment treaties by arbitral tribunals has led to the disintegration of the resulting structure of investment protection. The creation of an inflexible system of investment protection through arbitral interpretation undermines the exercise of power of states to take measures to protect the public interest. The process of disintegration of this unjust system must be hastened through the creation of new norms that ensure that obligatory rules deter the misconduct of multinational investors. If investment treaties are necessary, the regulatory power of states to promote the public interest should be given priority over investment protection.

Centrist television in the democratic South Africa: policymakers fail to answer the regional/local question, 1990-2011

Info ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 128-140
Author(s):  
Chris Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
South African ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Media Regulation ◽  
The Impact

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the disconnect between policy intent and policy implementation in relation to regional/local (sub-national) TV deliverables in South Africa between 1990 and 2011, and evaluate the impact of this disconnect in pursuit of public interest objectives. Design/methodology/approach – The article is based on a research case study in which data extracted from policy documents and interviews were qualitatively analysed via the Kingdon “policy streams” framework and the Feintuck and Varney public interest media regulation framework. Findings – It was found that ruptures in deliberative policymaking, and policy implementation missteps, undermined sub-national TV delivery and, in turn, undermined pursuit of the public interest. Originality/value – By combining a political science conceptual framework with a media policy conceptual framework, the article provides unique insights into South African TV policymaking in the early democratic era.

Forfeiting proceeds: Civil forfeiture, the right to property and the Constitution

2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-368
Author(s):  
Michael Rhimes
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Organised Crime ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Vexed Question ◽  
The Right ◽  
Crime Deterrence ◽  
Fair Balance

Civil forfeiture powers are a useful tool in the fight against crime — particularly the organised kind. They deter such crime by removing the proceeds from wrongdoers, thereby diminishing the incentives for offending. However, as the courts in South Africa have long recognised, the forfeiture powers must be calibrated to ensure a fair balance between the public interest in crime deterrence and private interests such as the right to property. Achieving this balance when forfeiting proceeds is a vexed question which this article seeks to explore. It argues that while the forfeiture of proceeds will usually be justified by the legitimate aim of crime deterrence, forfeiture should nevertheless be subject to a proportionality check. This check is arguably required by the property clause in s 25(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, and is justified by the need to constrain the breadth of the powers under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act. It then explores what situations might justify refusing forfeiture of proceeds, and how the proportionality check should be applied.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document