International Investment Rule of Law Between China and Africa

Han, **uli

doi:10.1007/978-981-19-1882-7_6

**uli Han⁷

Part of the book series: Modern China and International Economic Law ((CIEL))

188 Accesses

Abstract

The international investment rule of law between China and Africa is an integral part of the overall African investment rule of law, and of course, it is also an integral part of the Chinese investment rule of law. This part of the international investment rule of law plays an important role in maintaining the normal development of investment relations between China and Africa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic

EUR 32.99 /Month

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 129.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
About three Model versions, see Norah Gallagher and Wenhua Shan, Chinese Investment Treaties: Policies and Practice’ (Oxford University Press, 2008) Appendices, 423–439. Here, 1984, 1989 and 1997 are only approximate time.
2.
For 2010 Draft Chinese Model BIT Version IV, see ** and Developed Countries in Foreign Investment Disputes’ (2006) 14/1 George Mason Law Review 137 at 176–9.
76.
China-South Africa, article 4.
77.
China-South Africa, article 5, and China-Congo BIT article 5.2 has a similar provision.
78.
China-South Africa BIT, article 9.
79.
List of Contracting States and Other Signatories of the Convention (as of July 25, 2012), ICSID/3, available at <https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet>.
80.
See China-Congo BIT, article 10; China-Tunisia BIT, article 10; China-Equatorial Guinea BIT article 10; China-Mali BIT 10.
81.
China-Nigeria BIT, article 9.
82.
See China-Tanzania BIT, articles 3, 4 and 5.
83.
See China-Tanzania BIT, articles 3, 4 and 5; A German scholar likened FET standard in the international investment law to the bona fide principle in the civil code. See R. Dolzer, ‘Fair and Equitable Treatment: A Key Standard in Investment Treaties’ (2005) 39 The International Lawyer 91.
84.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.1.
85.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.3.
86.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.4 and footnote 10.
87.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.5.
88.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.6.
89.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.7.
90.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section A, Chapter 8, article 8.8.
91.
China-Mauritius BIT, article 13.3. The original text is “If a dispute involving the amount of compensation resulting from any measure referred to in paragraph (1) of Article 6 cannot be settled within six months after resort to negotiation as specified in paragraph (1) of this Article by the national and/or company concerned, it may be submitted to an international arbitral tribunal established by both parties. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply if the national and/or company concerned has resorted to the procedure specified in paragraph (2) of this article”.
92.
China-Mauritius FTA, Section B, articles 8.22–8.33.
93.
China-Ghana BIT, Article 3.3; China-Egypt BIT, article 3.3; China-Zimbabwe BIT, article 3.3; China-Algeria BIT, article 3.3; China-Sudan BIT, article 3.3; China-Cape Verde, article 3.3; China-Ethiopia BIT, article 3.3; China-Mauritius BIT, article 5.
94.
China-Gabon BIT, article 3.2; China- Morocco BIT, article 3.2.
95.
See, e.g., China-Congo BIT article 3.4, China-Tunisia BIT article 3.3, China-Equatorial Guinea BIT article 3.4, China-Mali BIT article 3.4, and China-Nigeria BIT 3.4.
96.
See China-Madagascar BIT, article 3.2.
97.
China-Madagascar BIT, article 1.
98.
China-Madagascar BIT, article 7.4.
99.
China-South Africa BIT 3.4.
100.
China-South Africa BIT 3.3.
101.
See UNCTAD, South Africa, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), available at <http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA/CountryBits/195#iiaInnerMenu>.
102.
See Piero Foresti, Laura de Carli and others v Republic of South Africa (ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/07/1), award, August 4, 2010, at 14–17, available at <https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet>. This case relates to Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, No 28 of 2002. This law is part of South Africa’s efforts to increase participation by historically disadvantaged South Africans in the mining industry, in other words, it is a measure to implement Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) Programme, which seeks to mandate black participation in commercial enterprises.
103.
China-South Africa BIT, article 6.
104.
China-Mali BIT, signed on February 12, 2009, entered into force on July 16, 2019.
105.
China-Mauritius BIT, article 11(Prohibitions and Restrictions).
106.
China-Mauritius FTA, article 8.9.
107.
China-Mauritius FTA, article 8.10.
108.
China-Mauritius FTA, article 8.11.
109.
China-Mauritius FTA, Articles 8.12, 8.13, 8.14, 8.16, 8.17,8.18,8.19,8.20.
110.
For example, China-Ghana BIT, signed on October 12, 1989, entered into force on November 22, 1990, article 1.
111.
For example, China- Tanzania BIT, signed on March 24, 2013, entered into force on April 17, 2014, article 1.
112.
China-Mauritius BIT, article 10.
113.
China-Madagascar BIT, article 7.1.
114.
Protection of Investment Act, 2015, Act No. 22 of 2015, Government Gazette, Republic of South Africa, Vol. 606 Cape Town, December 15, 2015, No. 39514, available at <https://www.thedti.gov.za/gazzettes/39514.pdf>, and <https://www.thedti.gov.za/business_regulation/acts/Investment_Act_22of2015.pdf>.
115.
Protection of Investment Act: Commencement, Government Gazette 41,766, July 13, 2018, available at <https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201807/41766gen395.pdf>.
116.
Protection of Investment Act, 2015, Act No. 22 of 2015, Government Gazette, Republic of South Africa, Vol. 606 Cape Town, December 15, 2015, No. 39514, available at <https://www.thedti.gov.za/gazzettes/39514.pdf>, and <https://www.thedti.gov.za/business_regulation/acts/Investment_Act_22of2015.pdf>.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

School of Law, **amen University, **amen, China
**uli Han

Authors

**uli Han
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to **uli Han .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Han, X. (2022). International Investment Rule of Law Between China and Africa. In: Legal Protection and Sustainability of Chinese Investments in Africa. Modern China and International Economic Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1882-7_6

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1882-7_6
Published: 27 August 2022
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-1881-0
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-1882-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics