The Controversial Role of Litigation in the Struggle to Revive Individual Access to the Tribunal of the Southern African Development Community

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Erika de Wet
Keyword(s):  
Southern African Development Community ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Member States ◽  
High Court ◽  
African Development ◽  
The Third ◽  
First Category ◽  
African Charter

The article examines four categories of litigation that were undertaken in the wake of the suspension of the SADC Tribunal. The first category of proceedings concerned a claim and request for an advisory opinion under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Charter); the second related to arbitration proceedings based on the SADC Protocol on Finance and Investment (FIP); the third focussed on proceedings regarding the potential unconstitutionality of a government’s participation in the suspension of the SADC Tribunal; while the fourth concerned conflicts between the SADC and employees before the Botswana High Court. In analysing these proceedings, the article assesses whether litigation thus far undertaken is likely to increase pressure on SADC member states to reinstate some form of individual complaints procedure before the SADC Tribunal.

scholarly journals Perceived Adverse Effects of Separating Government Institutions for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation Within the Southern African Development Community Member States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Livhuwani D. Nemakonde ◽  
Dewald Van Niekerk ◽  
Per Becker ◽  
Sizwile Khoza
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Climate Change Adaptation ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Southern African Development Community ◽  
Community Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
African Development ◽  
Government Institutions

Abstract Integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) is widely recognized as a solution for reducing the risk and impacts of disasters. However, successful integration seems elusive, and the two goals continue to function in isolation and in parallel. This article provides empirical insights into the perceived effects of separating government institutions for DRR and CCA within the Southern African Development Community member states. A mixed method research design was applied to the study. A total of 40 respondents from Botswana, Eswatini (until April 2018 Swaziland), Madagascar, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe participated in face-to-face interviews or an online survey. Five major effects of separating the organizations for DRR and CCA that impede efforts to reduce disaster risk coherently were identified: duplication of services, polarization of interventions, incoherent policies, competition for the same resources, and territorial contests. Given the continued fragmentation of institutions for DRR and CCA, highlighting these effects is important to emphasize the need for integrated approaches towards the reduction of disaster risk.

scholarly journals COVID-19 AND REGIONALISM IN AFRICA: THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) RESPONSE

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-130
Author(s):  
Chilaka Chigozie ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Deleterious Effect ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Southern African Development Community ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Member States ◽  
African Development ◽  
Tourism Education ◽  
The Impact

This paper x-rayed COVID-19 and regionalism in Africa focusing on the response of the Sothern African Development Community (SADC). It tried to examine the trend of COVID-19 on the SADC sub-region; the impact of COVID-19 on the sub-region and responses by SADC member states. The paper notes that COVID-19 pandemic has had a deleterious effect on SADC member states with many lives lost and more still recovering from the virus. The pandemic no doubt has impacted considerably on economic activities such as tourism, education, aviation, and other major sectors of the region’s economy. It may be too early to know the full impact of COVID-19 on the SADC sub-region. To date the experience of member states are varied. While the SADC member states have responded well to the pandemic, member states should among others prioritize testing for persons exhibiting symptoms, including health workers and others who are in the line of the fight against COVID-19 and monitor ongoing services rendered by health workers in other to identify gaps to be filled.

The Status of Member States not Participating in the Euro

2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 293-314
Author(s):  
David O’Keeffe ◽  
Catherine Turner
Keyword(s):  
Economic And Monetary Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Third Stage ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Heads Of State

In May 1998, the Council, meeting in the composition of Heads of State or Government, unanimously decided, in accordance with Article 121(2) EC, that eleven Member States fulfilled the necessary conditions to move towards the third and final stage of economic and monetary union (EMU) with the adoption of the single currency on 1 January 1999. This article will discuss the legal position of the Member States which did not initially progress to the third stage of EMU, in particular, the opt-outs exercised by the United Kingdom (UK) and Denmark. There follows an analysis of the extent of the UK and Danish opt-outs and the derogation which exists in relation to Sweden (and previously Greece) together with the role of these Member States in the new institutional framework as in operation from 1 January 1999. The current political discussions on the Euro taking place within the UK and Denmark will be highlighted.

Competence-Based Approach, Normative Control, and the International Responsibility of the EU and Its Member States

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 418-456
Author(s):  
Cristina Contartese
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Community ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Member States ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

Within the debate on the attribution of international responsibility to international organizations and/or its Member States, the role that the internal rules of the organization may play is not settled. The competence-based approach, where a relationship is supposed to exist between the EU/Member States’ division of competences and international responsibility, and the normative control doctrine, where the Union is deemed responsible for the actions of its Member States in the course of implementing EU law, are at the heart of such debate. This contribution aims to investigate whether the recent practice concerning the Union’s international responsibility in the fields of fisheries and investment adds clarifying elements. The analysis will specifically focus on the 2015 ITLOS Advisory Opinion (Case No 21), an award under the Energy Charter Treaty (Electrabel v Hungary), and the investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms laid down in the recent EU bilateral investment agreements. Although one of these cases seems to implicitly recognise the normative control as a rule for the attribution of conduct to the EU when its Member States act implementing Union acts, what is missing, however, is a clear and deep debate on its specific elements. Discussions on a competence-based approach and normative control seem generally confused at the EU as well as at the international community level, suggesting that important opportunities have been missed to properly re-open the debate on the role of the organizations’ internal rules for the attribution of international responsibility.

Competence-Based Approach, Normative Control, and the International Responsibility of the EU and Its Member States

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Contartese
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Community ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Member States ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
The Eu

Within the debate on the attribution of international responsibility to international organizations and/or its Member States, the role that the internal rules of the organization may play is not settled. The competence-based approach, where a relationship is supposed to exist between the EU/Member States’ division of competences and international responsibility, and the normative control doctrine, where the Union is deemed responsible for the actions of its Member States in the course of implementing EU law, are at the heart of such debate. This contribution aims to investigate whether the recent practice concerning the Union’s international responsibility in the fields of fisheries and investment adds clarifying elements. The analysis will specifically focus on the 2015 ITLOS Advisory Opinion (Case No 21), an award under the Energy Charter Treaty (Electrabel v Hungary), and the investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms laid down in the recent EU bilateral investment agreements. Although one of these cases seems to implicitly recognise the normative control as a rule for the attribution of conduct to the EU when its Member States act implementing Union acts, what is missing, however, is a clear and deep debate on its specific elements. Discussions on a competence-based approach and normative control seem generally confused at the EU as well as at the international community level, suggesting that important opportunities have been missed to properly re-open the debate on the role of the organizations’ internal rules for the attribution of international responsibility.

The Short Happy Life of the SADC Tribunal: the Perils of Regional Integration in Southern Africa

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Mwiza Jo Nkhata
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Southern Africa ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Southern African Development Community ◽  
Member States ◽  
African Development ◽  
Happy Life

AbstractUnder the Treaty Establishing the Southern African Development Community (the Treaty) one of the institutions of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) was the Southern African Development Community Tribunal (the Tribunal). The Tribunal was established as the sole judicial organ of SADC. The Tribunal was established as part of the reorganisation of regional integration efforts within Southern Africa. The global atmosphere prevailing at the time the Tribunal was established, together with the lofty statements in the SADC’s founding instruments, suggest that there was a regional commitment to the ideals of human rights, rule of law and democracy among SADC member States. The Tribunal’s life, however, was short-lived. This paper analyses the prospects and lessons for regional integration within the SADC region from the perspective of the disbanding of the Tribunal and attempts to decipher the implications of the disbanding for regional integration in Southern Africa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document