Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

Angola’s business environment remains one of the most difficult in the world. Investors must factor in pervasive corruption, an underdeveloped financial system, loss of U.S. corresponding banking relationships, abundant but unskilled labor, and extremely high operating costs. Surface transportation inside the country is slow and expensive, while bureaucracy and port inefficiencies complicate trade and raise costs.

The government continued to make concerted efforts to improve and diversify sources of foreign direct investment (FDI) which have been low, volatile and concentrated in the extractive sector. The New Private Investment Law (NPIL) approved by Presidential Decree 10/18, of June 26, 2018 eliminates preferential treatment to local investors and offers equal treatment to foreign investors. There are no laws or practices that discriminate against foreign investors, including U.S. investors. FDI is concentrated in the oil industry with negligible investments in the diamond, power generation, infrastructure, agriculture and health sectors. However, Angola has placed emphasis on investment in the agriculture sector to promote local production and help reduce its import bill. The NPIL also eliminated local content provisions for foreign investors, with local content provisions now only applicable to investments specific to the oil & gas, mining, banking and financial services, aviation, and shipping sectors.

Implementation of the New Private Investment Law (NPIL) remains slow and is not standardized. In November 2019, in collaboration with the American Chamber of Commerce in Angola (AmCham-Angola), the government launched the “Angola is Now” investment guide intended as a research tool to grant investors access to information on the business environment and investment opportunities in Angola. The guide contains information on Angola’s natural potential, private investment legislation, as well as the sectors of greatest interest, such as diamonds, other precious stones, iron ore, oil, agriculture, tourism, transportation, real estate and industry. Available in Portuguese and English, the guide also provides a wide range of information on the physical, geographical, environmental, economic and demographic characteristics of Angola’s 18 provinces and can also be accessed at: http://amchamangola.org/guide/ .

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

With the NPIL, the Angolan government eliminated the 35 percent local content requirement in foreign investments, and offered incentives to companies investing in the domestic economy, while maintaining minimal FDI screening processes, bringing it more in line with those of its sub-Saharan African neighbors. Foreign ownership remains limited to 49 percent in the oil and gas sectors, 50 percent in insurance, and 10 percent in the banking sectors. There are several objectives that the GRA seeks to accomplish through its FDI screening process: 1) create jobs for Angolans or transfer expertise to Angolan companies as part of an “Angolanization” plan; 2) protect sensitive industries such as defense and finance; 3) prevent capital flight or any other behavior that could threaten the stability of the Angolan economy; and, 4) diversify the economy.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

Angola has been a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) since 1996. The WTO performed a policy review of Angola in September 2015.

At the government’s request, on September 30, 2019, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) completed the Investment Policy Review (IPR) of Angola’s business and economic environments. The IPR was part of an EU funded wider technical assistance project aimed to assist Angola in attracting and benefitting from FDI beyond the extractives industry and support the GRA’s objective of increasing economic diversification and sustainable development. The full report and policy recommendations are accessible at: https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/diaepcb2019d4_en.pdf 

Business Facilitation

The World Bank Doing Business 2020 report ranked Angola 177 out of 190 countries and recorded an improvement in Angola’s monitoring and regulation of power outages, and in facilitating trade through the implementation of an automated customs data management system, ASYCUDA (Automated System for Customs Data) World, and by upgrading its port community system to allow for electronic information exchange between different parties involved in the import/export process. Launching a business typically requires 36 days, compared with a regional average of 27 days, with Angola ranked 146 out of the 190 economies evaluated.

The government has maintained the approximately twenty “Balcoes Unicos do Empreendedor” (“One Stop Shop” for Entrepreneurs) since 2012. In addition to the Balcoes Unicos process, new business owners must also complete processes at the Ministry of Commerce, the General Tax Administration (AGT) and the provincial court in the location where the business has its headquarters. The Angolan Private Investment and Export Promotion Agency (AIPEX) that replaced the Angolan Investment and Export Promotion Agency (APIEX) now serves as a one-stop shop to promote local and foreign investments, exports and the international competitiveness of Angolan companies. The new state-run private investment agency website is http://www.aipex.gov.ao/PortalAIPEX/#!/ . Contact Information: Departamento de Promoção e Captação do Investimento; Agencia de Investimento Privado e Promoção de Investimentos e Exportações de Angola (AIPEX). Rua Kwamme Nkrumah No.8, Maianga, Luanda, Angola Tel: (+244) 995 28 95 92| 222 33 12 52 Fax: (+244) 222 39 33 81

To encourage the flow of investors and to boost tourism, Presidential Decree 56/18, of February 20, 2018, exempts several neighboring countries from visa entry requirements, and as of March 30, visas upon arrival are available to 61 countries/regions, including the United States and the EU, upon presentation of proof of accommodation and financial support. The 2018 NPIL eliminates the 35 percent local partner stake in the capital structure of foreign investment in the electricity and water, tourism, transport and logistics, construction, media, telecommunications, and information technology (IT) sectors.

Angolan law provides equal access for women entrepreneurs and underrepresented minorities in the economy. However, in practice, the investment facilitation mechanisms do not provide added advantages to these groups. Programs to benefit female entrepreneurs and underrepresented groups such as startup projects, business capacity building and development, and financial assistance including micro credit, are mainly implemented by non-governmental organizations and international financial institutions such as the African Development Bank (AfDB), the World Bank (WB), and private sector companies.

Outward Investment

The Angolan Government does not promote or incentivize outward investment nor does it restrict Angolans from investing abroad. Investors are free to invest in any foreign jurisdiction. According to data from the BNA, in 2018, the government did not invest abroad but received returns on previous investments abroad.

Domestic investors invest preferably in Portuguese speaking countries with few investing in neighboring countries in Sub Saharan Africa. The bulk of investment is in fashion, fashion accessories and domestic goods. Due to foreign exchange constraints, there has been very little or no investment abroad by domestic investors.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Angola’s regulatory system is complex, vague, and inconsistently enforced. In many sectors, no effective regulatory system exists due to a lack of institutional and human capacity. The banking system is slowly adhering to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Public sector companies (SOEs) are still far from practicing IFRS. The public does not participate in draft bills or regulations formulation, nor does a public online location exist where the public can access this information for comment or hold government representatives accountable for their actions. The Angolan Communications Institute (INACOM) sets prices for telecommunications services and is the regulatory authority for the telecommunications sector. Revised energy-sector licensing regulations have permitted some purchase power agreements (PPA) participation.

Overall, Angola’s national regulatory system does not correlate to other international regulatory systems. However, Angola is a member of the WB, ADB AfDB, OPEC (January 2007), the United Nations (UN) and most of its specialized agencies – International Conference on Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), UNCTAD, the IMF, the World Health Organization (WHO), the WTO, and has a partnership agreement with the EU. At the regional level, the GRA is part of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries (CPLP), and the SADC, among other organizations. Angola has yet to join the SADC Free Trade Zone of Africa as a full member. On March 21, 2018 together with 44 African countries, Angola joined the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), an agreement aimed at paving the way for a liberalized market for goods and services across Africa. Angola is also a member of the Port Management Association of Eastern and Southern Africa (PMAESA), which seeks to maintain relations with other port authorities or associations, regional and international organizations and governments of the region to hold discussions on matters of common interest.

Angola became a member of the WTO on November 23,1996. However, it is not party to the Plurilateral Agreements on Government Procurement, the Trade in Civil Aircraft Agreement and has not yet notified the WTO of its state-trading enterprises within the meaning of Article XVII of the GATT. A government procurement management framework introduced in late 2010 stipulates a preference for goods produced in Angola and/or services provided by Angolan or Angola-based suppliers. TBT regimes are not coordinated. There have been no investment policy reviews for Angola from either the OECD or UNCTAD in the last four years. Angola conducts several bilateral negotiations with Portuguese Speaking countries (PALOPS), Cuba and Russia and extends trade preferences to China due to credit facilitation terms, while attempting to encourage and protect local content.

Regulation reviews are based on scientific or data driven assessments or baseline surveys. Evaluation is based on data. However, evaluation is not made available for public comment.

The National Assembly is Angola’s main legislative body with the power to approve laws on all matters (except those reserved by the constitution to the government) by simple majority (except if otherwise provided in the constitution). Each legislature comprises four legislative sessions of twelve months starting on October 15 annually. National Assembly members, parliamentary groups, and the government hold the power to put forward all draft-legislation. However, no single entity can present draft laws that involve an increase in the expenditure or decrease in the State revenue established in the annual budget.

The president promulgates laws approved by the assembly and signs government decrees for enforcement. The state reserves the right to have the final say in all regulatory matters and relies on sectorial regulatory bodies for supervision of institutional regulatory matters concerning investment. The Economic Commission of the Council of Ministers oversees investment regulations that affect the country’s economy including the ministries in charge. Other major regulatory bodies responsible for getting deals through include:

• The National Gas and Biofuels Agency (ANPG): The government regulatory and oversight body responsible for regulating oil exploration and production activities. On February 6, 2019, the parastatal oil company Sonangol launched the National Gas and Biofuels Agency (ANPG) through the Presidential decree 49/19 of February 6. The ANPG is the new national concessionaire of hydrocarbons in Angola, authorized to conduct, execute and ensure oil, gas and biofuel operations run smoothly, a role previously held by Sonangol. The ANPG must also ensure adherence to international standards and establish relationships with other international agencies and sector relevant organizations.

• The Regulatory Institute of Electricity and Water Services (IRSEA): The regulatory authority for renewable energies and enforcing powers of the electricity regulatory authority.

• The Angolan Communications Institute (INACOM): The institute sets prices for telecommunications services and is the regulatory authority for the telecommunications sector. Revised energy-sector licensing regulations have improved legal protection for investors to attract more private investment in electrical infrastructure, such as dams and hydro distribution stations.

• As of October 1, 2019, a 14 percent VAT regime came into force, replacing the existing 10 percent Consumption Tax. The General Tax Administration (AGT) is the office that oversees tax operations and ensures taxpayer compliance. The new VAT tax regime aims to boost domestic production and consumption, and reduce the incidence of compound tax created for businesses unable to recover consumption tax incurred. VAT may be reclaimed on purchases and imports made by taxpayers, making it neutral for business.

Angola acceded to the New York Arbitration Convention on August 24, 2016 paving the way for effective recognition and enforcement in Angola of awards rendered outside of Angola and subject to reciprocity. Angola participates in the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), which includes a peer review mechanism on good governance and transparency. Enforcement and protection of investors is under development in terms of regulatory, supervisory, and sanctioning powers. Investor protector mechanisms are weak or almost non-existent.

There are no informal regulatory processes managed by nongovernmental organizations or private sector associations, and the government does not allow the public to engage in the formulation of legislation or to comment on draft bills. Procurement laws and regulations are unclear, little publicized, and not consistently enforced. Oversight mechanisms are weak, and no audits are required or performed to ensure internal controls are in place or administrative procedures are followed. Inefficient bureaucracy and possible corruption frequently lead to payment delays for goods delivered, resulting in an increase in the price the government must pay.

No regulatory reform enforcement mechanisms have been implemented since the last ICS report, in particular those relevant to foreign investors. The Diário da República (the Federal Register equivalent), is a legal document where key regulatory actions are officially published.

International Regulatory Considerations

Angola’s overall national regulatory system does not correlate to other international regulatory systems and is overseen by its constitution. Angola is not a full member of the International Standards Organization (ISO), but has been a corresponding member since 2002. The Angolan Institute for Standardization and Quality (IANORQ) within the Ministry of Industry & Commerce coordinates the country’s establishment and implementation of standards. Angola is an affiliate country of the International Electro-technical Commission that publishes consensus-based International Standards and manages conformity assessment systems for electric and electronic products, systems and services.

A government procurement management framework introduced in late 2010 stipulates a preference for goods produced in Angola and/or services provided by Angolan or Angola-based suppliers. Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) regimes are not coordinated. Angola acceded to the Kyoto Convention on February 23, 2017.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Angola’s formal legal system is primarily based on the Portuguese legal system and can be considered civil law based, with legislation as the primary source of law. Courts base their judgments on legislation and there is no binding precedent as understood in common law systems. The constitution proclaims the constitution as the supreme law of Angola (article 6(1) and all laws and conduct are valid only if they conform to the constitution (article 6(3).

The Angolan justice system is slow, arduous, and often partial. Legal fees are high, and most businesses avoid taking commercial disputes to court in the country. The World Bank’s Doing Business 2020 survey ranks Angola 186 out of 190 countries on contract enforcement, and estimates that commercial contract enforcement, measured by time elapsed between filing a complaint and receiving restitution, takes an average of 1,296 days, at an average cost of 44.4 percent of the claim.

Angola has commercial legislation that governs all commercial activities but no specialized court. In 2008, the Angolan attorney general ruled that Angola’s specialized tax courts were unconstitutional. The ruling effectively left businesses with no legal recourse to dispute taxes levied by the Ministry of Finance, as the general courts consistently rule that they have no authority to hear tax dispute cases, and refer all cases back to the Ministry of Finance for resolution. Angola’s Law 22/14, of December 5, 2014, which approved the Tax Procedure Code (TPC), sets forth in its Article 5 that the courts with tax and customs jurisdiction are the Tax and Customs Sections of the Provincial Courts and the Civil, Administrative, Tax and Customs Chamber of the Supreme Court. Article 5.3 of the law specifically states that tax cases pending with other courts must be sent to the Tax and Customs Section of the relevant court, except if the discovery phase (i.e., the production of proof) has already begun.

The judicial system is administered by the Ministry of Justice at trial level for provincial and municipal courts and the supreme court nominates provincial court judges. In 1991, the constitution was amended to guarantee judicial independence. However, as per the 2010 constitution, the president appoints supreme court judges for life upon recommendation of an association of magistrates and appoints the attorney general. Confirmation by the General Assembly is not required. The system lacks resources and independence to play an effective role and the legal framework is obsolete, with much of the criminal and commercial code reflecting colonial era codes with some Marxist era modifications. Courts remain wholly dependent on political power.

There is a general right of appeal to the court of first instance against decisions from the primary courts. To enforce judgments/orders, a party must commence further proceedings called executive proceedings with the civil court. The main methods of enforcing judgments are:

• Execution orders (to pay a sum of money by selling the debtor’s assets);
• Delivery up of assets; and,
• Provision of information on the whereabouts of assets.

The Civil Procedure Code also provides ordinary and extraordinary appeals. Ordinary appeals consist of first appeals, review appeals, interlocutory appeals, and full court appeals, while extraordinary appeals consist of further appeals and third-party interventions. Generally, an appeal does not operate as a stay of the decision of the lower court unless expressly provided for as much in the Civil Procedure Code.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

AIPEX is the investment and export promotion center tasked with promoting Angola’s export potential, legal framework, environment, and investment opportunities in the country and abroad. Housed within the Ministry of Industry & Commerce, AIPEX is also responsible for ensuring the application of the 2018 NPIL on foreign direct investments, entered into force on June 26, 2018.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

On May 17, 2018 Angola’s National Assembly approved the nation’s first anti-trust law. The law set up the creation of the Competition Regulatory Authority, which prevents and cracks down on actions of economic agents that fail to comply with the rules and principles of competition. The Competition Regulatory Authority of Angola (Autoridade Reguladora da Concorrência – ARC) was created by Presidential Decree no. 313/18, of December 21, 2018, and it succeeds the now defunct Instituto da Concorrência e Preços. It has administrative, financial, patrimonial and regulatory autonomy, and is endowed with broad supervisory and sanctioning powers, including the power to summon and question persons, request documents, carry out searches and seizures, and seal business premises.

The ARC is responsible, in particular, for the enforcement of the new Competition Act of Angola, approved by Law no. 5/18, of May 10, 2018 and subsequently implemented by Presidential Decree no. 240/18, of October 12. The Act has a wide scope of application, pertaining to both private and state-owned undertakings, and covers all economic activities with a nexus to Angola. The Competition Act prohibits agreements and anti-competitive practices, both between competitors (“horizontal” practices, the most serious example of which are cartels), as well as between companies and its suppliers or customers, within the context of “vertical” relations.

Equally prohibited is abusive conduct practiced by companies in a dominant position, such as the refusal to provide access to essential infrastructures, the unjustified rupture of commercial relations and the practice of predatory prices, as well as the abusive exploitation, by one or more companies, of economically-dependent suppliers or clients. Prohibited practices are punishable by heavy fines that range from one-ten percent of the annual turnover of the companies involved. Offending companies that collaborate with the ARC, by revealing conduct until then unknown or producing evidence on a voluntary basis, may benefit from significant fine reductions, under a leniency program yet to be developed and implemented by the ARC. Considering the ample powers and potentially heavy sanctions at the disposal of the ARC, companies present in (or planning to enter) Angola are well advised to consider carefully the impact of the new law on their activities, in order to mitigate any risk that its market conduct may be found contrary to the Competition Act.

Expropriation and Compensation

Under the Land Tenure Act of November 9, 2004 and the General Regulation on the Concession of Land (Decree no 58/07 of July 13, 2007), all land belongs to the state and the state reserves the right to expropriate land from any settlers. The state is only allowed to transfer ownership of urban real estate to Angolan nationals, and may not grant ownership over rural land to any private entity (regardless of nationality), corporate entities or foreign entities. The state may allow for land usage through a 60-year lease to either Angolan or foreign persons (individuals or corporate), after which the state reserves legal right to take over ownership.

Expropriation without compensation remains a common practice. Land tenure became a more significant issue following independence from Portugal when over 50 percent of the population moved to urban centers during the civil war. The state offered some areas for development within a specific timeframe. After this timeframe, areas that remained underdeveloped reverted to the state with no compensation to any claimants. In most cases, claimants allege unfair treatment and little or no compensation.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Angola is not a member state to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID Convention), but has ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Its ratification was endorsed domestically via resolution No. 38/2016, published in the Official Gazette of Angola on August 12, 2016.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The Angolan Arbitration Law (Law 16/2003 of July 25) (Voluntary Arbitration Law — VAL) provides for domestic and international arbitration. Substantially inspired by Portuguese 1986 arbitration law, it cannot be said to strictly follow the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. In contrast, the VAL contains no provisions on definitions, rules on interpretation, adopts the disposable rights criterion in regards to arbitration, does not address preliminary decisions, nor distinguish between different types of awards, and permits appeal on the merits in domestic arbitrations, unless the parties have otherwise agreed.

Angola is also a member of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), which can provide dispute settlement assistance as part of its political risk insurance products and eligibility for preferential trade benefits under the African Growth Opportunity Act. The United States and Angola have signed a TIFA, which seeks to promote greater trade and investment between the two nations. The U.S. Embassy is aware of one ongoing formal investment dispute involving an American company.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Although not widely implemented, the Government of Angola and public sector companies recognize the use of arbitration to settle disputes with foreign arbitration awards issued in foreign courts. In 2016, Angola took a major step in international arbitration by signing the New York Convention on recognition of foreign arbitration awards. On March 6, 2017, the Government of Angola deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention with the UN Secretary General. The Convention entered into force on June 4, 2017.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Angola is ranks 168 out of 190 on the World Bank’s Doing Business 2020 report on resolving insolvency. Banks are bound to comply with prudential rules aimed at ensuring that they maintain a minimum amount of funds not less than the minimal stock capital at all times to ensure adequate levels of liquidity and solvability. Insolvency is regulated by the Law on Financial Institutions No. 12/2015 of June 17, 2015. Based on this law, the BNA increased the social capital requirement for banks operating in the country by 200 percent (BNA notice 2/2015) to guard against possible damages to clients and the financial system. All monetary deposits up to 12.5 million Kwanzas (USD 27,000 equivalent) are also to be deposited into the BNA’s Deposit Guarantee Funds account (Presidential Decree 195/18 of 2018) so that clients (both local and foreign) are guaranteed a refund in case of bankruptcy by their respective bank. Article 69 of the law expressly states that it is the responsibility of the president of the Republic to create the fund, but it is silent on the rules governing its operation or the amounts guaranteed by the fund.

In 2018, based on Notice 2/2018 on the “Adequacy of Minimum Capital Stock and Regulatory Own Funds of Financial Banking Institutions,” commercial banks were required to increase their operating capital from 2.5 billion to 7.5 billion kwanzas (USD 35 million) by the end of the year. In late 2019, following results from an Asset Quality Review, the government announced plan to recapitalize the largest state-owned bank, Banco de Poupanco e Credito (BPC). The injection of capital will constitute the third capital injection into BPC by the state since 2015, which has previously received close to USD2 billion of state funds to help restructure the bank.  In early 2019, the BNA revoked the operating licenses of two private banks, Banco Mais and Banco Postal, due to their inability to recapitalize to meet new mandatory operating capital requirements. A third bank, Banco Angolano e Comércio de Negócios (BANC), was also put under administration due to its poor governance and a failure to also raise the mandatory operating capital to meet new minimum requirements.

In 2015, following the 2014 collapse of Banco Espirito Santo Angola (BESA), the subsidiary of Portugal’s Banco Espírito Santo, the State intervened and restructured BESA which now operates as Banco Economico. In August 2019, the BNA ordered Banco Economico’s shareholders to increase the bank’s capital to comply with the new BNA-imposed capital requirements no later than June 2020. While Angola’s arbitration law (Arbitration Law No. 16/03) for insolvency adopted in 2013 introduced the concept of domestic and international arbitration, the practice of arbitration law is still not widely implemented.

The law criminalizes bankruptcy under the following classification: condemnation in Angola or abroad for crimes of fraudulent bankruptcy, i.e. involvement of shareholders or managers in fraudulent activities that result in the bankruptcy, negligence bankruptcy, forgery, robbery, or involvement in other crimes of an economic nature. The Ministry of Finance, the BNA and the Capital Markets Commission (CMC) oversee credit monitoring and regulation.

Real Property

Transparency and land property rights are critical for Angolan economic development, given that two thirds of Angolans work in agriculture and are directly dependent on land property rights. However, the Land Act (Lei de Terras de Angola) has not been revised since its approval in December 2004. While the land act is a crucial step toward addressing issues of land tenure, normalization of land ownership in Angola persists with problems such as difficulties in completing land claims, land grabbing, lack of reliable government records, and unresolved status of traditional land tenure. Among other provisions, the law included a formal mechanism for transforming traditional land property rights into legal land property rights (clean titles). During the civil war, a transparent system of land property rights did not exist, so it was crucial to re-establish one shortly after the end of hostilities in 2002.

According to the “Land Act,” the State may transfer or constitute, for the benefit of Angolan natural or legal persons, a multiplicity of land rights on land forming part of its private domain. Although, it is possible to transfer ownership over some categories of land, the transfer of State land almost never implies the transfer of its ownership, but only the formation of minor land rights with leasehold being the most common form in Angola. The recipient of private property rights from the State can only transfer those rights with consent of the local authority and after a period of five years of effective use of the land (GRA 2004 law). Weak land tenure legislation and lack of secure legal guarantees (clean titles), are the reasons given by most commercial banks for their greater than 80 percent refusal rate for loans since land is used as collateral. Foreign real-estate developers therefore seek out public-private partnership (PPP) arrangements with State actors who can provide protection against land disputes and financial risks involved in projects that require significant cash outlays to get started.

Registering parcels of land over 10,000 hectares must be approved by the Council of Ministers. Registering property takes 190 days on average, ranking 167 out of 173 according to the World Bank’s Doing Business 2020 survey, with fees averaging three percent of property value. Owners must also wait five years after purchasing before reselling land. There are no written regulations setting out guidelines defining different forms of land occupation, including commercial use, traditional communal use, leasing, and private use. Over the years, the government has given out large parcels of land to individuals in order to support the development of commercial agriculture. However, this process has largely been unsystematic and does not follow any formal rule change on land tenure by the State.

Before obtaining proof of title nationwide, an Angolan citizen or an Angolan legal entity must also obtain the Real or Leasing Rights (“Usufruct”) of the Land from the Instituto de Planeamento e Gestão Urbana de Luanda, an often a time-consuming procedure that can take up to a year or more. However, in the case that a company already owns the land, it must secure a land property title deed from the Real Estate Registry in Luanda. An updated property certificate (“certidão predial”) is obtained from the relevant Real Estate Registry, with the complete description of the property including owner(s) information and any charges, liens, and/or encumbrances pending on the property. The complex administration of property laws and regulations that govern land ownership and transfer of real property as well as its tedious registration process may reduce investor appetite for real estate investments in Angola. Despacho no. 174/11 of March 11, 2011 mandates the total fees for the “certidão predial” include stamp duty (calculated according to the Law on Stamp Duty); justice fees (calculated according to the Law on Justice Fees); fees to justice officers (according to the set contributions for the Justice budget); and, notary and other fees. The total fee is also dependent on the current value of the fiscal unit (UCF).

Intellectual Property Rights

Angolan law recognizes the protection of intellectual property rights (IPR). Angola’s National Assembly adopted the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Intellectual Property in August 2005, incorporating the 1979 text, and the Patent Cooperation Treaty concluded in 1970 and later amended in 1979 and 1984. The Ministry of Industry administers IPR for trademarks, patents, and designs under Industrial Property Law 3/92. The Ministry of Culture regulates authorship, literary, and artistic rights under Copyright Law 4/90. Angola is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and follows international patent classifications of patents, products, and services to identify and codify requests for patents and trademark registration.

IAPI (Instituto Angolano de Propriedade Intelectual) is the governmental body within the Ministry of Industry & Commerce charged with implementing patent and trademark law. The Ministry of Culture, Tourism & Environment oversees copyright law. IP infringement is widespread, most notably in the production and distribution of pirated CDs, DVDs, and other media, largely for personal consumption. Counterfeit pharmaceuticals are another major area of concern.

There are currently no statistics available regarding counterfeit goods seized by the Angolan government. INADEC (Instituto Nacional de Defesa dos Consumidores), under the umbrella of the Ministry of Industry & Commerce, tracks and monitors the Angolan government’s seizures of counterfeit goods. They do not currently have a website, nor do they regularly publish statistics. They publish information on seizures of counterfeit products on an ad-hoc basis, primarily in the government-owned daily, Jornal de Angola.

Angola is not included in the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ . The U.S. Embassy point of contact for IPR related issues is Mballe Nkembe (NkembeMM@state.gov). For legal counsel, refer to Angola’s Country Commercial Guide Local Professional Services List (http://export.gov/ccg/angola090710.asp )

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

The government actively encourages Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and is committed to doubling it over the next several years.  Foreign companies are free to invest and list on the regional stock exchange Bourse Regionale des Valeurs Mobilieres (BRVM), which is based in Abidjan and covers the eight countries of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU).  WAEMU members are part of the Regional Council for Savings and Investment, a regional securities regulatory body.

In most sectors, there are no laws that limit foreign investment.  There are restrictions on foreign investment in the health sector, law and accounting firms, and travel agencies.  There are regulations designed to control land speculation in urban areas, but they do not prevent foreigners from owning land.  Freehold land tenure in rural areas is difficult to negotiate, however, and can inhibit foreign investment.  Land tenure disputes exist all over the country owing to the lack of formal private land ownership in most areas.  Companies that wish to purchase land must have the property surveyed before obtaining title.  Surveying is tightly controlled by a small oligopoly of companies and can often cost more than the value of the parcel of land.  Most businesses, including agribusinesses and forestry companies, circumvent the complicated land purchase process by acquiring long-term leases instead.

The Ivoirian government’s investment promotion agency, the Center for the Promotion of Investment in Côte d’Ivoire (CEPICI), promotes and attracts national and foreign investment.  Its services are available to all investors, provided through a one-stop shop intended to facilitate business creation, operation, and expansion.  CEPICI ensures that investors receive incentives outlined in the investment code, and facilitates access to industrial land.  More information is available at http://www.cepici.gouv.ci/ .

Côte d’Ivoire maintains an ongoing dialogue with investors through various business networks and platforms, such as CEPICI, the Ivoirian Chamber of Commerce (CCI-CI), the association of large enterprises (CGECI), and the bankers’ association.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Foreign investors generally have access to all forms of remunerative activity on terms equal to those enjoyed by Ivoirians.  The government encourages foreign investment, including state-owned and public firms that the government is privatizing, although in most cases the state reserves an equity stake in the new company.

There are no general, economy-wide limits on foreign ownership or control, and few sector-specific restrictions.  There are no laws specifically directing private firms to adopt articles of incorporation or association that limit or prohibit foreign investment, participation, or control in those firms, and no such practices have been reported.

Banks and insurance companies are subject to licensing requirements, but there are no restrictions designed to limit foreign ownership or to limit establishment of subsidiaries of foreign companies in this sector.  Investments in health, law and accounting, and travel agencies are subject to prior approval and require appropriate licenses and association with an Ivoirian partner.  The Ivoirian government has, on a case-by-case basis, mandated using local providers, hiring local employees, or arranging for eventual transfer to local control.

The government does not have an official policy to screen investments and its overall economic and industrial strategy does not discriminate against foreign-owned firms.  There are indications in some instances of preferential treatment for firms from countries with longstanding commercial ties to Côte d’Ivoire.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

Côte d’Ivoire has not conducted an investment policy review (IPR) through the OECD.  The WTO last conducted a Trade Policy Review in July 2012 and it can be found at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp366_e.htm .

UNCTAD does not provide an IPR report for Côte d’Ivoire, though there are statistics on FDI in the UNCTAD country profile at https://unctadstat.unctad.org/countryprofile/generalprofile/en-gb/384/index.html .

The Government of Côte d’Ivoire provides information about sector policies and business opportunities in publicly available reports.  More information can be found at: http://www.cepici.gouv.ci/en/  or at: www.gcpnd.gouv.ci/ .

Business Facilitation

To improve the business environment, and as part of its successful efforts to secure a Compact with the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the government completed a series of reforms using the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index as a reference.  These included:  accelerating the business creation process to 24 hours and issuing construction permits within 26 days, establishing a one-stop shop for external trade, and establishing a single tax-declaration form.  In 2019, Côte d’Ivoire improved its Doing Business ranking from 122^nd  to 110^th place.

Côte d’Ivoire’s online information portal containing all documents dedicated to business creation and registration (https://cotedivoire.eregulations.org/ ) is managed by CEPICI.  All the necessary documentation for registration is available online.  The one-stop shop for business registration takes 24 hours and has all the agencies under a single roof, giving a simplified approach to business creation.  Foreign investors have noted the one-stop shop has been very successful in speeding up registration.

Women have equal access to the registration process, and there have not been any reports of discrimination in that regard.

Outward Investment

Côte d’Ivoire does not promote or incentivize outward investment.  

The government does not restrict domestic investors from investing abroad.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

The government has taken steps to encourage a more transparent and competitive economic environment.  The IMF, World Bank, EU, and other large donors continue to urge the government to make further reforms.  The government aims for transparency in law and policy to foster competition and provide clear rules of the game and a level playing field for domestic and foreign investors.  Transparency of the Ivoirian regulatory system, however, is a concern as both foreign and Ivoirian companies complain that new regulations are issued with little warning and without a period for public comment.

There are no informal regulatory processes managed by non-governmental organizations or private sector associations.

Regulatory authority and decision-making exist only at the national level.  Sub-national jurisdictions do not regulate business.  For most industries or sectors, regulations are developed through the ministry responsible for that sector.  In the telecommunications, electricity, cocoa, coffee, cotton, and cashew sectors, the government has established control boards or independent agencies to regulate the sector and pricing.  Companies have complained that rules for buying prices determined by the agriculture commodity regulatory agencies tend to be opaque and prices are arbitrarily set without reference to world prices.

Côte d’Ivoire’s accounting, legal, and regulatory procedures are consistent with international norms, though both foreign and Ivoirian businesses often complain about the system’s lack of clarity and the government’s poor communication.  Côte d’Ivoire is a member of the Organization for the Harmonization of African Business Law (OHADA), which is common to 16 countries and adheres to the WAEMU accounting system.  In accounting, companies use the WAEMU system, which complies with international norms and is a source of economic and financial data.

Draft legislation and regulations are not published or made available for public comment.  The government, however, often holds public seminars and workshops to discuss proposed plans with trade and industry associations.

Regulatory actions are published in the Journal Officiel de la Republique de Côte d’Ivoire (Official Journal of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire), which is available for purchase at newsstands, and by subscription on the Journal’s website http://www.sgg.gouv.ci/jo.php  and at https://abidjan.net/ .

The Autorité Nationale de Régulation des Marchés Publics (National Regulatory Authority for Public Procurement; ANRMP), polices transparency in public procurement and private sector compliance with public procurement rules.  Consumers, trade associations, private companies, and individuals have the right to file complaints with ANRMP to hold the government to its own administrative processes.

The U.S. government does not have any knowledge of recent regulatory system reforms, including enforcement reforms, that have been announced since the last ICS report.  The government has fully implemented regulatory reforms announced in prior years, with the goal to create an enabling business environment, foster competition, and build investor confidence in the economy.

Public and private institutions tasked with controlling and regulating various sectors make regulatory enforcement mechanisms available to the public.

Regulatory bodies regularly publish and promote access to their data for the business community and development partners, , allowing for scientific and data-driven reviews and assessments.  Quantitative analysis and public comments are made available.

The Ivoirian government promotes transparency of public finances and debt obligations (including explicit and contingent liabilities) with the publication of this information through the following websites:

http://budget.gouv.ci/main/index 

https://www.tresor.gouv.ci/tres/fr_FR/rapport-de-la-dette-publique/ 

International Regulatory Considerations

The Ivoirian government incorporates WAEMU directives into its public procurement bidding policy, processes, and auditing.  Recent changes include separating auditing and regulating functions, transitioning from a national to a regional system of procurement for intellectual services, and increasing advance payment for the initial procurement of goods and services from 25 to 30 percent.  The ANRMP regulates public procurement with a view to improving governance and transparency.  It has the authority to sanction entities that do not comply with public procurement regulations.

Ivoirian laws, codes, professional association standards, and regional body membership obligations are incorporated in the country’s regulatory system.  The private sector often follows European norms, to take advantage of the Ivoirian trade agreement with the EU, one of Côte d’Ivoire’s largest markets.

Côte d’Ivoire has been a WTO member since 1995 but has not notified all draft technical regulations to the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade.  Côte d’Ivoire signed the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) in December 2013 and ratified it in December 2015.  The government has made efforts to implement the TFA requirements.  The government established the National TFA Committee (NTFC) to coordinate TFA implementation.  The USAID trade facilitation program has strengthened the capacity of the NTFC.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

The Ivoirian legal system is based on the French civil law model.  The law guarantees to all the right to own and transfer private property.  Rural land, however, is governed by a separate set of laws which make ownership and transfer very difficult.  The court system enforces contracts.

Côte d’Ivoire is a signatory to OHADA, which provides common corporate law and arbitration procedures for the 16 member states.  The Commercial Court of Abidjan adjudicates corporate law cases and contract disputes.  Mediation is also available through the Ivoirian legal framework in addition to the Commercial Court and the Arbitration Tribunal.  Following the recommendations of business associations and commercial law experts, in August 2017, the government established the Court of Appeals of the Commercial Court of Abidjan.  The IMF recommended the creation of other commercial juridical bodies in the interior of the country, though these have not yet been established and the Commercial Court of Abidjan retains jurisdiction for the entire country.

The Ivoirian judicial system is ostensibly independent, but magistrates are sometimes subject to political or financial influence.  Judges sometimes fail to prove that their decisions are based on the legal or contractual merits of a case and are often seen to rule against foreign investors in favor of entrenched interests.  The greatest complaint from investors is the slow dispute resolution process.  Cases are often postponed and appealed without a reasonable explanation, moving from court to court for years or even decades.  Regulations or enforcement actions are appealable and adjudicated through the national court system.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The 2018 Investment Code is the primary law governing investment conduct.  The code does not restrict foreign investment or the repatriation of funds.  The code offers a mix of fiscal incentives, combining tax exoneration and tax credits to encourage investment.  The government also offers incentives to promote small businesses and entrepreneurship, low-cost housing construction, factories, and infrastructure development, which the government considers key to the country’s economic development.  Some sectors have additional laws which govern investment activity in those sectors.  In mining, for example, the Mining Code allows a period for holding permits for ten years with a possibility to extend for two more years on a limited permit area of 400 square kilometers.

The CEPICI provides a one-stop shop website to assist investors.  More information on Côte d’Ivoire’s laws, rules, procedures, and reporting requirements can be found at:

www.apex-ci.org/

www.cepici.gouv.ci/

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Small Business Promotion, through the Commission on Anti-Competition Practices, is responsible for reviewing competition–related concerns under the 1991 competition law, which was updated in 2013.  ANRMP is responsible for reviewing the awarding of contracts.

No significant competition cases were reported over the past year.

Expropriation and Compensation

Private expropriation to force settlement of contractual or investment disputes continues to be a problem.  Local individuals or local companies, using what appear to be spurious court decisions, have challenged the ownership of some foreign companies in recent years.  On occasion, the government has blocked the bank accounts of U.S. and other foreign companies because of ownership and tax disputes.

There is no history of public expropriations.

In cases of illegal expropriations, Ivoirian law affords claimants due process.  Even so, perceived corruption and lack of capacity in the judicial and security services have resulted in poor enforcement of private property rights, particularly when the entity in question is foreign and the plaintiff is Ivoirian or a long-established foreign resident.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Côte d’Ivoire is a signatory to the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and a signatory to the New York Convention of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.

In cases where the firm does not meet the nationality conditions stipulated by Article 25 of the Convention, the code stipulates that the dispute be resolved within the provisions of the supplementary mechanisms approved by the ICSID.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Côte d’Ivoire is a signatory to investment agreements subject to binding international arbitration of investment disputes.  Côte d’Ivoire recognizes and has been known to enforce foreign arbitral awards, but enforcement is inconsistent.

Côte d’Ivoire does not have a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) or a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States.

In the past 10 years, foreign investors have had investment disputes, which often have been resolved through arbitration or amicable settlement.  There have been no reported disputes involving U.S. firms in the past 10 years.  As Côte d’Ivoire is a signatory to the New York Convention of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, local courts are obliged to enforce foreign arbitral awards.

The U.S. government is not aware of any history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors, including U.S. firms.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The Abidjan-based regional Joint Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA) provides a means of solving contractual disputes.  The arbitration tribunal has the ability to enforce awards more quickly, but the use of the tribunal in lieu of the court system has been limited.

Côte d’Ivoire is a member of OHADA, whose provisions adopted in 1999 have replaced domestic law on arbitration.  The unified law is based on the UNICITRAL model law.

Judgments of foreign courts are recognized but difficult to enforce in local courts.  To avoid working through the Ivoirian legal system, some investors stipulate in contracts that disputes must be settled through international commercial arbitration.  Yet, even if stipulated in the contract, decisions reached through OHADA are sometimes not honored by local courts.

The U.S. government is not aware of cases in which Côte d’Ivoire’s domestic courts have shown preferential treatment for state-owned enterprises involved in investment disputes.

Bankruptcy Regulations

As a member of OHADA, Côte d’Ivoire has both commercial and bankruptcy laws that address the liquidation of business liabilities.  OHADA is a regional system of uniform laws on bankruptcy, debt collection, and rules governing business transactions.  OHADA permits three different types of bankruptcy liquidation:  an ordered suspension of payment to permit a negotiated settlement; an ordered suspension of payment to permit restructuring of the company, similar to Chapter 11; and the complete liquidation of assets, similar to Chapter 7.  Creditors’ rights, irrespective of nationality, are protected equally by the Act.  Bankruptcy is not criminalized.  Court-ordered monetary settlements resulting from declarations of bankruptcy are usually paid out in local currency.  Côte d’Ivoire is ranked 85 out of 190 countries for ease of resolving insolvency, according to the World Bank’s Doing Business Report.

The joint venture Credit Info – Volo West Africa manages regional credit bureaus in the WAEMU.

Real Property

The Ivoirian civil code provides for the enforcement of private property rights, and the government has undertaken reform efforts to secure property rights.  Mortgages and liens exist.  Secured interests in property are enforced by the Land Registry Office of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.  In the World Bank’s Doing Business 2020 report, Côte d’Ivoire is ranked 112 out of 190 countries for registering property.

Foreign and/or nonresident investors who wish to lease land must obtain a permit for the development of the site, as well as a prefectural or sub-prefectural order recognizing occupation of the site.

The Audace Institute, an independent Ivoirian think tank, estimates that 96 percent of land does not have a clear title.  The government has committed to titling all private land by 2026.  The government has made efforts to raise awareness on land titling throughout the country and to streamline procedures for obtaining land titles.  In 2018, the World Bank approved a program to build institutional capacity needed to support the implementation of the national rural land tenure security program, and register customary land rights in selected rural areas.  The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development requires that all land to be titled be professionally surveyed.  The surveying, which must be performed by one of the few companies authorized by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development to execute land surveys in Côte d’Ivoire, can cost more than the value of the land.  The status of the land from which thousands of Ivoirians fled during the 2011 post-election conflict has not been resolved.  Much of that land is now occupied by persons who do not hold title, many of whom are immigrants or descendants of immigrants from neighboring countries to the north of Côte d’Ivoire.  A lack of title and a conflict between modern land tenure law and traditional practice hinders resolution of land tenure disputes.

It is not necessary to occupy legally purchased property in order to retain title.

Intellectual Property Rights

The Ivoirian Civil Code includes measures to protect intellectual property rights (IPR), but the government has limited resources for their enforcement.  The government’s Office of Industrial Property is charged with ensuring the protection of patents, trademarks, industrial designs, and commercial names.  Patents are valid for 10 years, with the possibility of two extensions of five years each.  Trademarks are valid for 10 years and are renewable indefinitely. Copyrights are valid for 50 years.  The Ivoirian Copyright Office has a labeling system in place to prevent counterfeiting and to protect audio, video, literary, and artistic property rights in music and computer programs.  While Ivoirian IPR law is in conformity with standards established by the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the country lacks customs checks at its porous borders, limiting the law’s impact.

The government has not adopted any IPR-related laws or regulations in the past year.

By law, the government must protect intellectual property on both exported and imported goods. Customs has the power to seize imported products that violate IPR laws even if installed with other equipment, including equipment detained, marketed, or illegally supplied.  Such seizures, generally of counterfeit consumer goods (increasingly medicines), are routinely publicized on government websites and media outlets, although statistics on seizures are unavailable.  The intellectual property office’s police unit has sometimes conducted raids on retail outlets and street vendors to confiscate pirated CDs and DVDs and instituted legal proceedings against counterfeiters.  IPR violations are prosecuted, and penalties vary from imprisonment of three months to two years and fines from 100,000 to 5,000,000 CFA (USD 166 to 8,333 based on an average exchange rate of 600 CFA to one U.S. dollar).

Côte d’Ivoire is not listed in the United States Trade Representative (USTR)Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ 

Policies towards Foreign Direct Investment

Ethiopia needs significant inflows of FDI to meet its ambitious growth goals. Over the past year, to attract more foreign investment, the government has passed a new investment law, ratified the New York Convention on Arbitration, and streamlined commercial registration and business licensing laws. The government has also started implementing the Public Private Partnership (PPP) proclamation (law), to allow for private investment in the power generation and road construction sectors.

The Ethiopian Investment Commission (EIC) has the mandate to promote and facilitate foreign investments in Ethiopia. To accomplish this task, the EIC is charged with 1) promoting the country’s investment opportunities to attract and retain investment; 2) issuing investment permits, business licenses, and construction permits; 3) issuing commercial registration certificates and renewals; 4) negotiating and signing bilateral investment agreements; 5) issuing work permits; and 6) registering technology transfer agreements. In addition, the EIC has the mandate to advise the government on policies to improve the investment climate and hold regular and structured public-private dialogue with investors and their associations. At the local level, regional investment agencies facilitate regional investment. Though Ethiopia has shown relative progress in two doing business indicators, specifically the ease of obtaining construction permits and registering property, its overall rank on the 2020 World Bank Ease of Doing Business Index was 159 out of 190 countries, which is the exact same ranking from 2018 and 2019. In order to improve the investment climate, attract more FDI, and tackle unemployment challenges, the Prime Minister’s Office formed a committee to systematically examine each indicator on the Doing Business Index and identify factors that inhibit businesses.

The American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) works on voicing the concerns of U.S. businesses in Ethiopia. AmCham provides a mechanism for coordination among American companies and also facilitates regular meetings with government officials to discuss issues that hinder operations in Ethiopia. The Addis Ababa Chamber of Commerce also organizes a monthly business forum that enables the business community to discuss issues related to the investment climate with government officials by sector.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish, acquire, own, and dispose of most forms of business enterprises. A new Investment Proclamation, approved in early 2020, outlines the areas of investment reserved for government and local investors. There is no private ownership of land in Ethiopia. All land is owned by the state, but can be leased for up to 99 years. Small-scale rural landholders have indefinite use rights, but cannot lease out holdings for extended periods, except in the Amhara Region. The 2011 Urban Land Lease Proclamation allows the government to determine the value of land in transfers of leasehold rights, in an attempt to curb speculation by investors.

A foreign investor intending to buy an existing private enterprise or shares in an existing enterprise needs to obtain prior approval from the EIC. While foreign investors have complained about inconsistent interpretation of the regulations governing investment registration (particularly relating to accounting for in-kind investments), they generally do not face undue screening of FDI, unfavorable tax treatment, denial of licenses, discriminatory import or export policies, or inequitable tariff and non-tariff barriers.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

Over the past three years, the government has not undertaken any third party investment policy review by a multilateral or non-governmental organization. The government has worked closely with some international stakeholders, however, such as the International Finance Corporation, in its recent attempts to modernize and streamline its investment regulations.

Business Facilitation

The EIC has attempted to establish itself as a “one-stop shop” for foreign investors by acting as a centralized location where investors can obtain the visas, permits, and paperwork they need, thereby reducing the time and cost of investing and acquiring business licenses. The EIC has worked with international consultants to modernize its operations, and as part of its work plan has adopted a customer manager system to build lasting relationships and provide post-investment assistance to investors. Despite progress, the EIC readily admits that many bureaucratic barriers to investment remain. In particular, U.S. investors report that the EIC, as a federal organization, has little influence at regional and local levels. According to the 2020 World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Report, on average, it takes 32 days to start a business in Ethiopia.

Currently, more than 95 percent of Ethiopia’s trade passes through the Port of Djibouti, with residual trade passing through the Somaliland Port of Berbera or Port Sudan. Ethiopia concluded an agreement in March of 2018 with the Somaliland Ports Authority and DP World to acquire a 19 percent stake in the joint venture developing the Port of Berbera. The agreement will help Ethiopia secure an additional logistical gateway for its increasing import and export trade. Following the July 2018 rapprochement with Eritrea, the Ethiopian government has investigated the opportunity of accessing an alternative port at either Massawa or Assab.

The Government of Ethiopia is working to improve business facilitation services by making the licensing and registration of businesses easier and faster, though online registration is not yet available. An amended commercial registration and licensing law eliminates the requirement to publicize business registrations in local newspapers, allows business registration without a physical address, and reduces some other paperwork burdens associated with business registration. U.S. companies can obtain detailed information for the registration of their business in Ethiopia from an online investment guide to Ethiopia: (https://www.theiguides.org/public-docs/guides/ethiopia ). Though the government is taking positive steps to socially empower women (approximately half of cabinet members are women), there is no special treatment provided to women who wish to engage in business.

The full Doing Business Report is available here: http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/ethiopia 

http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/ethiopia  http://www.doingbusiness.org/en/data/exploreeconomies/ethiopia#DB_sb 

http://www.doingbusiness.org/en/data/exploreeconomies/ethiopia#DB_sb 

Outward Investment

There is no officially recorded outward investment by domestic investors from Ethiopia as citizens/local investors are not allowed to hold foreign accounts.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Ethiopia’s regulatory system is generally considered fair, though there are instances in which burdensome regulatory or licensing requirements have prevented the local sale of U.S. exports, particularly health-related products. Investment decisions can involve multiple government ministries, lengthening the registration and investment process.

The Constitution is the highest law of the country. The Parliament enacts proclamations, which are followed by regulations that are passed by the Council of Ministers, and implementing directives that are passed by ministries or agencies. The government increasingly engages the public for feedback before passage of draft legislation through public meetings, and regulatory agencies request comments on proposed regulations from stakeholders. Ministries or regulatory agencies do neither impact assessments for proposed regulations nor ex-post reviews. Parties that are affected by an adopted regulation can request reconsideration or appeal to the relevant administrative agency or court. There is no requirement to periodically review regulations to determine whether they are still relevant or should be revised.

All proclamations and regulations in Ethiopia are published in official gazettes and most of them are available online: http://www.hopr.gov.et/web/guest/122  and https://chilot.me/federal-laws/2/ 

Legal matters related to the federal government are entertained by Federal Courts, while state matters go to state courts. To ensure consistency of legal interpretation and to promote predictability of the courts, the Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division is empowered to give binding legal interpretation on all federal and state matters. Though there are no publicly listed companies in Ethiopia, all banks and insurance companies are obliged to adhere to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).

Regulations related to human health and environmental pollution are often enforced. In January 2019, the Oromia Region Environment, Forest and Climate Change Commission shut down three tanneries in Oromia Region for what was said to be repeated environmental pollution offenses. The government also suspended the business license of MIDROC Gold Mine in May 2018 following weeks of protests by local communities who accused the company of causing health and environmental hazards in the Oromia Region. The Ethiopian Parliament in February of 2019 passed a bill entitled ‘Food and Medicine Administration Proclamation,’ which bans smoking in all indoor workplaces, public spaces, and means of public transport and prohibits alcohol promotion on broadcasting media.

Ethiopia published on April 7 the Administrative Procedure Proclamation (APP) in the federal gazette, the final step for a law to come into force. The APP’s main aim is to allow ordinary citizens who seek administrative redress to file suits in federal courts against government institutions. Potential redress includes financial restitution. The APP’s passage will require government institutions to set up offices that will handle such complaints. Complainants are required to follow an administrative appeal process, and only after exhausting administrative remedies will a person be allowed to file a suit in federal court. Four government institutions are exempt from the APP: the Federal Attorney General’s Office; the Ethiopian Federal Police; the Ethiopian Defense Forces and the intelligence agencies. The enactment of the APP is widely viewed as a positive step in increasing confidence in the public sector and addressing the need for governmental institutions to adhere to the rule of law.

Ethiopia is a member of UNCTAD’s international network of transparent investment procedures . Foreign and national investors can find detailed information from the investment commission website http://www.investethiopia.gov.et/investment-process  and https://www.theiguides.org/public-docs/guides/ethiopia  on administrative procedures applicable to investment and income generating operations. These details include the number of steps; name and contact details of the entities and persons in charge of procedures; required documents and conditions; costs; processing times; and legal bases justifying the procedures.

The government released its five-year public finance administration strategic plan (2018-2022) in March 2018, mapping out reforms in government revenue and expenditure forecasting, government accounts management, internal auditing, public procurement administration, public debt management, and public financial transparency and accountability. In support of this initiative, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) issued a directive on Public Financial Transparency and Accountability in October 2018. The directive mandates that all public institutions report their budgetary performance and financial accounts in platforms that are accessible to the wider public in a timely manner. It also makes the MOF responsible for disseminating a regular and detailed physical and financial performance evaluation of large publicly-funded projects. The directive further outlines a clear timeline for the publication of each major piece of budgetary information, such as the pre-budget macroeconomic and fiscal framework, the enacted budget, quarterly execution reports, annual execution reports, and the annual audit report.

International Regulatory Considerations

Ethiopia ratified the AfCFTA on March 21, 2019. The AfCFTA aims to create a single, continental market for goods and services, with free movement of business persons and investments. Ethiopia is also a member of Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), a regional economic block, which has 21 member countries and has introduced a 10 percent tariff reduction on goods imported from member states. Ethiopia has not yet joined the COMESA free trade area, however. Ethiopia resumed its World Trade Organization (WTO) accession process in 2018, which it originally began in 2003, but which later stagnated.

Ethiopian standards have a national scope and applicability and some of them, particularly those related to human health and environmental protection, are mandatory. The Ethiopian Standards Agency is the national standards body of Ethiopia.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Ethiopia has codified criminal and civil laws, including commercial and contractual law. According to the contractual law, a contract agreement is binding between contracting parties. Disputes between the parties can be taken to court. There are, however, no specialized courts for commercial law cases, although there are specialized benches at both the federal and state courts.

While there have been allegations of executive branch interference in judiciary cases with political implications, there is no evidence of widespread interference in purely commercial disputes. The country has a procedural code for civil and criminal court, but the practice is minimal. Enforcement actions are appealable and there are at least three appeal processes from the lower courts to the Supreme Court. The Criminal Procedure Code follows the inquisitorial system of adjudication.

Companies that operate businesses in Ethiopia assert that courts lack adequate experience and staffing, particularly with respect to commercial disputes. While property and contractual rights are recognized, judges often lack understanding of commercial matters, including bankruptcy and contractual disputes. In addition, cases often face extended scheduling delays. Contract enforcement remains weak, though Ethiopian courts will at times reject spurious litigation aimed at contesting legitimate tenders.

Ethiopia is in the process of reforming its Commercial Code to bring it in line with international best practices. The draft legislation appears to address many concerns raised by the business community, including the creation of a commercial court under the regular court system to improve the expertise of judges as well as to increase the speed with which commercial disputes are resolved. The new Commercial Code should also include regulations covering e-commerce and digital businesses.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The Investment Proclamation 1180/2020 is Ethiopia’s main legal regime related to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). This law instituted the opening of new economic sectors to foreign investment, enumerated the requirements for FDI registration, and outlined the incentives that are available to investors.

The 2020 investment law allows foreign investors to invest in any investment area except those that are clearly reserved for domestic investors. A few specified investment areas are possible for foreign investors only as part of a joint venture with domestic investors or the government. The Investment Proclamation has introduced an Investment Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, to accelerate implementation of the new law and to address coordination challenges investors face at the federal and regional levels. Further, the new law expanded the mandate of the EIC by allowing it to provide approvals to foreign investors proposing to buy existing enterprises. The EIC now also delivers “one stop shop” services by consolidating investor services provided by other ministries and agencies. Still, the EIC delegates licensing of investments in some areas: air transport services (the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority), energy generation and transmission (the Ethiopian Energy Authority), and telecommunication services (the Ethiopian Communications Authority).

The EIC’s website  (http://www.investethiopia.gov.et/ ) provides information on the government’s policy and priorities, registration processes, and regulatory details. In addition, the Ethiopian Investment Guide website (https://www.theiguides.org/public-docs/guides/ethiopia ) provides relevant laws, rules, procedures, and reporting requirements for investors.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Ethiopia’s Trade Practice and Consumers Protection Authority (TPCPA), operating under the Ministry of Trade and Industry, is tasked with promoting a competitive business environment by regulating anti-competitive, unethical, and unfair trade practices to enhance economic efficiency and social welfare. It has an administrative tribunal with a jurisdiction on matters pertaining to market competition and consumer protection. The authority also annually entertains many cases associated with consumer protection and unfair trade practices.

The EIC reviews investment transactions for compliance with FDI requirements and restrictions as outlined by the Investment Proclamation. Nonetheless, companies have complained that SOEs receive favorable treatment in the government tender process. The public sector’s heavy involvement in economic development means that SOEs often obtain a sizeable portion of open tenders.

Expropriation and Compensation

Per the 2020 Investment Proclamation, no investment by a domestic or foreign investor or enterprise can be expropriated or nationalized, wholly or partially, except when required by public interest in compliance with the law and provided adequate compensatory payment.

The former Derg military regime nationalized many properties in the 1970s. The current government’s position is that property seized lawfully by the Derg (by court order or government proclamation published in the official gazette) remains the property of the state. In most cases, property seized by oral order or other informal means is gradually being returned to the rightful owners or their heirs through a lengthy bureaucratic process. Claimants are required to pay for improvements made by the government during the time it controlled the property. The Public Enterprises, Assets, and Administration Agency stopped accepting requests from owners for return of expropriated properties in July of 2008.

According to local and foreign businesses operating in the Oromia Region, there have been a number of isolated incidents threatening investors in that region. Various pretexts have been used to close legitimate operations. False charges have been filed with regional courts, property has been confiscated, and bank accounts have been frozen, all in the name of “returning the land” to the “rightful owners” or “creating job opportunities” for the youth. Regional officials, however, deny any systematic attack on investors and have repeatedly provided assurance that all legitimate investors will be protected. Meanwhile, other investors who have invested heavily in government and community relations and actively engaged local and regional officials have prospered. The experience of investors is overall uneven and clear trends are not evident.

Dispute Settlement

• ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Since 1965, Ethiopia has been a non-signatory member state to the International Centre for Settlement of Disputes (ICSID) Convention. In 2020 the Parliament ratified the Convention on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (commonly known as the New York Convention).

• Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The constitution and the investment law both guarantee the right of any investor to lodge complaints related to his/her investment with the appropriate investment agency. If he/she has a grievance against a legal or regulatory decision, he/she can appeal to the investment board or to the respective regional agency, as appropriate. According to the new investment law, the investment dispute between the state and foreign investor can be resolved either through the courts or via arbitration, with the precondition of government agreement for resolution via the latter. Additionally, a dispute that arises between a foreign investor and the state may be settled based on the relevant bilateral investment treaty.

Due to an overloaded court system, dispute resolution can last for years. According to the 2020 World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business report, it takes on average 530 days to enforce contracts through the courts.

• International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Arbitration has become a widely used means of dispute settlement among the business community as the Ethiopian civil code recognizes Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms as a means of dispute resolution. The Addis Ababa Chamber of Commerce has an Arbitration Center to assist with arbitration. Subsequent to Ethiopia’s ratification of the New York Convention, local courts now must automatically recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards from a New York Convention member state country. There are no publicly available statistics that indicate a bias in the courts towards state-owned enterprises (SOEs) as pertains to investment/commercial disputes.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The Ethiopian Commercial Code (Book V) outlines bankruptcy provisions and proceedings and establishes a court system that has jurisdiction over bankruptcy proceedings. The primary purpose of the law is to protect creditors, equity shareholders, and other contractors. Bankruptcy is not criminalized. In practice, there is limited application of bankruptcy procedures due to lack of knowledge on the part of the private sector.

According to the 2020 World Bank Doing Business Report, Ethiopia stands at 149 in the ranking of 190 economies with respect to resolving insolvency. Ethiopia’s score on the strength of insolvency framework index is 5.0. (Note: The index ranges from zero to 16, with higher values indicating insolvency legislation that is better designed for rehabilitating viable firms and liquidating nonviable ones.)

Real Property

The constitution recognizes and protects ownership of private property, however all land in Ethiopia belongs to “the people” and is administered by the government. Private ownership does not exist, but land-use rights have been registered in most populated areas. As land is public property, it cannot be mortgaged. Confusion with respect to the registration of urban land-use rights, particularly in Addis Ababa, is common. Allegations of corruption in the allocation of urban land to private investors by government agencies are a major source of popular discontent. The government retains the right to expropriate land for the common good, which it defines as including expropriation for commercial farms, industrial zones, and infrastructure development. While the government claims to allocate only sparsely settled or empty land to investors, some people have been resettled. In particular, traditional grazing land has often been defined as empty and expropriated, leading to resentment, protests and, in some cases, conflict. In addition, leasehold regulations vary in form and practice by region. Successful investors in Ethiopia conduct thorough due diligence on land titles at both regional and federal levels, and conduct consultations with local communities regarding the proposed use of the land before investing.

We encourage potential investors to ensure their needs are communicated clearly to the host government. It is important for investors to understand who had land-use rights preceding them, and to research the attitude of local communities to an investor’s use of that land, particularly in the region of Oromia, where conflict between international investors and local communities has occurred.

The 2020 World Bank Doing Business Report has ranked Ethiopia 142 out of 190 economies in registering property, as it takes on average 52 days to register property.

Intellectual Property Rights

The Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) oversees intellectual property rights (IPR) issues. Ethiopia is has not completed its WTO accession and consequently is not party to the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Ethiopia is not yet a signatory to a number of major IPR treaties, such as the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty, the Berne Convention for Literary and Artistic Works, the Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks, or the Patent Cooperation Treaty. Ethiopia recently ratified the Marrakesh Treaty to facilitate access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or otherwise print disabled. The government has expressed its intention to accede to the Berne Convention, the Paris Convention, and the Madrid Protocol. EIPO is primarily tasked with protecting Ethiopian patents and copyrights and fighting software piracy. Historically, however, the EIPO has struggled with a lack of qualified staff and small budgets; further, the institution does not have law enforcement authority. Abuse of U.S. trademarks is rampant, particularly in the hospitality and retail sectors. The government does not publicly track counterfeit goods seizures, and no estimates are available. Ethiopia is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or Notorious Markets List.

EIPO contact and office information is available at http://www.eipo.gov.et/ 

For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles  from this page: http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/details.jsp?country_code=ET 

http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/details.jsp?country_code=ET 

Embassy POC: Economic Officer, USEmbassyPolEconExternal@state.gov

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

Gabon’s 1998 investment code conforms to Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC) investment regulations and provides the same rights to foreign companies operating in Gabon as to domestic firms.  Businesses are protected from expropriation or nationalization without appropriate compensation, as determined by an independent third party.  Certain sectors, such as mining, forestry, petroleum, agriculture, and tourism have special specific investment codes, which encourage investment through customs and tax incentives. Since June 2019 Gabon, through the Investment Promotion Agency, started work on a new investment code.  The current Minister of Investment Promotion Carmen Nadaot has established a team to work on how to improve Gabon’s rank in the “Ease of Doing Business” report.

Gabon established the Investment Promotion Agency (ANPI-Gabon) with the assistance of the World Bank in April 2014.  The ANPI-Gabon’s mission is to promote investments and exports, support small and medium-sized enterprises, manage public-private partnerships, and help companies to get established.  The agency is designed to act as the gateway for investment into the country and reduce administrative procedures, costs, and waiting periods.

Gabonese authorities have made efforts to prioritize investment.  On March 7, 2017, the High Council for Investment was established to promote investment and boost the economy.  This body provides a platform for dialogue between the public and private sectors, and its main objectives are to improve the economy and create jobs.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

There are no limits on foreign ownership or control, except for discrete activities customarily reserved for the state, including military and paramilitary activities.

Foreign investors are largely treated in the same manner as their Gabonese counterparts regarding the purchase of real estate, negotiation of licenses, and entering into commercial agreements.  There is no general requirement for local participation in investments (see local labor requirements below).  Many businesses find it useful to have a local partner who can help navigate the subjective aspects of the business environment. 

Gabon Oil Company, a state-owned enterprise created in 2011, has an automatic right to purchase up to a 15 percent share in any hydrocarbon contract at market price.

The standard practice is for the Gabonese Presidency to review foreign investment contracts after ministerial-level negotiations are completed.  In certain cases, the Presidency has appeared to intervene to keep negotiations stalled at the ministerial level on track to a mutually satisfactory solution.  The Presidency takes an active interest in meeting with investors.  The lack of a standardized procedure for new entrants to negotiate deals with the government can lead to confusion and time-consuming negotiations.  Moreover, the centralization of decision-making by a few senior officials who are exceedingly busy can delay the process.  As a result, new entrants often find the process of finalizing deals time-consuming and difficult to navigate.

U.S. investors are not disadvantaged by ownership or control mechanisms, sector restrictions, or investment screening mechanisms.  However, French companies continue to dominate major sectors in Gabon.  Lack of French language skills can put American or non-Francophone firms at a disadvantage.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

Gabon has been a World Trade Organization (WTO) member since 1995.  In June 2013, Gabon conducted an investment policy review with the WTO.  The government has not conducted any investment policy reviews through the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) or the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in the past four years.

Business Facilitation

The government encourages investments in Gabon’s sectors that contribute the greatest share to GNP, including oil and gas, mining, and timber through customs and tax incentives.  For example, oil and mining companies are exempt from customs duties on imported working equipment.  The Tourism Investment Code, enacted in 2000, provides tax incentives to foreign tourism investors during the first eight years of operation.  A special economic zone (SEZ) located at Nkok offers tax incentives to industrial investors; the government may increase the number of special economic zones in a move to attract investment.

ANPI-Gabon houses more than 20 public and private agencies, including the Chamber of Commerce, National Social Security Fund (CNSS), and National Health Insurance and Social Security (CNAMGS).  ANPI-Gabon aims to attract domestic and international investors through improved methods of approving and licensing procedures and support for public-private dialogue.  It has a single window registration process that allows domestic and foreign investors to register their business in 48 hours.  There are no special mechanisms for equitable treatment of women and underrepresented minorities in Gabon.

ANPI-Gabon’s website address is:
https://www.investingabon.ga/ 

Outward Investment

One of ANPI-Gabon’s primary goals is to promote outward investments and exports.  The Gabonese government does not restrict domestic investors from investing abroad.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Government policies and laws often do not establish clear rules of the game, and foreign firms can have difficulty navigating the bureaucracy.  Despite reform efforts, hurdles and red tape remain, especially at the lower and mid-levels of the ministries.  Lack of transparency in administrative processes and lengthy bureaucratic delays occasionally raise questions for companies about fair treatment and the sanctity of contracts.

Rule-making and regulatory authority rests at the ministerial level.  There are no nongovernmental organizations or private sector associations that manage informal regulatory processes.  The government of Gabon has not exhibited any recent tendency to discriminate against U.S. investments, companies, or representatives.

The government does not publish proposed laws and regulations in draft form for public comment.  There are no centralized online locations where key regulatory actions, nor are their summaries published.  Key regulatory actions are published in the government’s printed Official Journal.  It is not uncommon for legislative proposals to be provided “off the record” to the press.

In 2015, Gabon implemented a recommendation from CEMAC to program its budget by objectives.  Despite improvements, Gabon still does not have a fully transparent budget. No new regulatory systems have been announced in the last year, and no new reforms have been implemented in the last year.  Regulations are developed by the relevant ministry concerned, and regulatory enforcement is controlled by individual ministries.  There are no instances of regulations being reviewed on the basis of scientific or data-driven assessments.

International Regulatory Considerations

Gabon is a member of CEMAC, along with Cameroon, the Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and Chad.  Gabon is also member of a larger economic community: The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS).  Headquartered in Gabon, ECCAS has 11 members: Gabon, Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda, and São Tomé and Príncipe.  Both CEMAC and ECCAS work to promote economic cooperation among members.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Gabon’s legal system is based on French Civil Law.  Regular courts handle commercial disputes in compliance with the Organization for Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA).  Courts do not apply the law consistently, and delays are frequent in the judicial system.  Lack of transparency in administrative processes and lengthy bureaucratic delays call into question the country’s commitment to fair treatment and the sanctity of contracts.  Judicial capacity is weak, and many government contacts underscore the need for specialized training in technical issues such as money laundering and environmental crimes.  Foreign court and international arbitration decisions are accepted, but enforcement may be difficult.

Gabon has a written code of commercial law.  Gabon is affiliated with OHADA and has been a WTO member since January 1, 1995.

The judicial system is not independent from the executive branch.  Gabon’s judicial bodies are subject to political influence, creating uncertainty concerning fair treatment and the sanctity of contracts.  Regulations or enforcement actions are appealable and are adjudicated in the national court system.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Gabon’s 1998 investment code, which gives foreign companies operating in Gabon the same rights as domestic firms, allows foreign investors to choose freely from a wide selection of legal business structures, such as a private limited liability company or public limited liability company.  The distinctions arise primarily from the minimum capital requirements and the conditions under which shares may be re-sold.  Foreign investment in Gabon is subject to local law that is in many instances unsettled or unclear, and in certain cases, Gabonese law may require local majority ownership of businesses.  The state reserves the right to invest in the equity capital of ventures established in certain sectors (e.g., petroleum and mining).  There are no known systemic practices by private firms to restrict foreign investment, participation, or control.

ANPI-Gabon’s website contains some information on investing in Gabon: https://www.investingabon.ga

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Gabonese Law No. 5/89 of July 6, 1989 on Competition covers all aspects of competition and anti-trust (http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=8814 ).  The relevant ministry for a given dispute reviews transactions for competition-related concerns.

Expropriation and Compensation

Foreign firms established in Gabon operate on an equal legal basis with national companies. Businesses are protected from expropriation or nationalization without appropriate compensation, as determined by an independent third party.  The Gabonese government has not exhibited a tendency to discriminate against U.S. investments, companies, or representatives, nor have there been any indications or reports of incidences of indirect expropriation, such as through confiscatory tax regimes.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Gabon is a member state of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and a signatory to the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention).  The 1965 Code of Civil Procedure provides for various means of enforcement of judgments (both foreign and domestic), depending on the nature of the decree or decision.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Gabon does not have a BIT with the United States.  Post is aware of one investment dispute involving a U.S. company.

In 2018, there was one case of a foreign arbitral award issued against the government.  In March 2018, the Société d’Energie et d’Eau du Gabon (SEEG), a subsidiary of the Veolia Group, filed a request for conciliation against Gabon at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).  Veolia and the Gabonese government signed an agreement to settle the case in February 2019.  Gabon agreed to buy Veolia’s 51 percent stake in SEEG and Veolia agreed to withdraw its arbitrage case once the agreement is finalized.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

No alternative dispute resolution options exist within Gabon.  Investment disputes are generally negotiated directly with the governmental entity involved.  There is no domestic arbitration body within the country.  Local courts recognize foreign arbitral awards, but enforcement may be difficult.

Post is not aware of any cases of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) being involved in investment disputes in the court system.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Gabon has a bankruptcy law, but it is not well developed.  In the World Bank’s Doing Business Report 2020 (http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/134861574860295761/pdf/Doing-Business-2020-Comparing-Business-Regulation-in-190-Economies-Economy-Profile-of-Gabon.pdf), Gabon ranks 130 out of 190 economies on the ease of resolving insolvency.

Gabon’s bankruptcy law is based on OHADA regulations.  According to Section 3: Art 234-239 of OHADA’s Uniform Insolvency Act, creditors and equity shareholders, collectively or individually, may designate trustees to lodge complaints or claims to the commercial court.  These laws criminalize bankruptcy, and the OHADA regulations grant Gabon the discretion to apply its own remedies.

Real Property

Secured interest in property is recognized, and the recording system is relatively reliable.

There are no specific regulations for foreign and/or non-resident investors regarding land lease or acquisition.  Laws in Gabon for private and commercial property do not provide any restrictions on nationality for the possession and ownership of property in Gabon.

Almost 85 percent of Gabon’s area (and possibly 95 percent or more) is legally owned by the state.  Only 14,000 private land titles appear to have been registered in Gabon according to a 2012 report; most refer to tiny urban parcels.  Urban areas constitute no more than one percent of total land area.  The government created the National Agency for Urban Planning, Surveys and the Land Registry in 2011.

If property legally purchased is unoccupied by the owner, property ownership can revert to others.

Intellectual Property Rights

As a member of CEMAC and ECCAS, Gabon adheres to the laws of the African Intellectual Property Office (OAPI).  Based in Yaoundé, Cameroon, OAPI aims to ensure the publication and protection of patent rights, encourage creativity and transfer of technology, and create favorable conditions for research.  As a member of OAPI, Gabon acceded to a number of international agreements on patents and intellectual property (IP), including the Paris Convention, the Berne Convention and the Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).  As a member of the WTO, Gabon is also a signatory of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.  U.S. companies have not raised IP rights (IPR) concerns with the Embassy.

During the past year, no IP related laws or regulations were enacted concerning IPR protection.  Gabon does not report on seizures of counterfeit goods.  Gabon is not in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report.  Gabon is not listed in USTR’s Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see the WIPO country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Resources for Rights Holders

John McGuire
Economic Chief
U.S. Mission to Gabon and São Tomé & Príncipe
Tél: (241) 11.45.71.11
Librevilleeconomic@state.gov

For a list of local attorneys visit:  https://ga.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/attorneys/

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

Kenya has enjoyed a steadily improving environment for foreign direct investment (FDI). Foreign investors seeking to establish a presence in Kenya generally receive the same treatment as local investors, and multinational companies make up a large percentage of Kenya’s industrial sector. The government’s export promotion programs do not distinguish between goods produced by local or foreign-owned firms. The major regulations governing FDI are found in the Investment Promotion Act (2004). Other important documents that provide the legal framework for FDI include the 2010 Constitution of Kenya, the Companies Ordinance, the Private Public Partnership Act (2013), the Foreign Investment Protection Act (1990), and the Companies Act (2015). GOK membership in the World Bank’s Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) provides an opportunity to insure FDI against non-commercial risk. In November 2019, KenInvest launched the Kenya Investment Policy (KIP) and the County Investment Handbook (CIH) (http://www.invest.go.ke/publications/) which aim to increase foreign direct investment in the country. The investment policy intends to guide laws being drafted to promote and facilitate investments in Kenya.

The Central Bank has successfully maintained macroeconomic stability with relatively low inflation and stable exchange rates. The National Treasury is increasingly focused on efforts to ensure prudent debt management. Kenya puts significant effort into assuring the health and growth of its tourism industry. To strengthen Kenya’s manufacturing capacity, the government offers incentives to produce goods for export.

Investment Promotion Agency

Kenya Investment Authority (KenInvest), the country’s official investment promotion agency, is viewed favorably by international investors (http://www.invest.go.ke/). KenInvest’s mandate is to promote and facilitate investment by assisting investors in obtaining the licenses necessary to invest and by providing other assistance and incentives to facilitate smoother operations. To help investors navigate local regulations, KenInvest has developed an online database known as eRegulations, designed to provide investors and entrepreneurs with full transparency on Kenya’s investment-related regulations and procedures (https://eregulations.invest.go.ke/?l=en ).

KenInvest is part of the National Business and Economic Response of the GOK and has been instrumental in assessing and relaying information about the private sector effects of Covid-19 to inform policy measures during the pandemic. The agency is also tracking post-Covid-19 investment sectors.

The GOK prioritizes investment retention and maintains an ongoing dialogue with investors. All proposed legislation must pass through a period of public consultation in which investors have an opportunity to offer feedback. Private sector representatives can serve as board members on Kenya’s state-owned enterprises. Since 2013, the Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA), the apex private sector business association, has had bi-annual round table meetings with President Kenyatta and his cabinet. Investors’ concerns are considered by a Cabinet committee on the ease of doing business, chaired by President Kenyatta. The American Chamber of Commerce has also taken an increasingly active role in engaging the GOK on Kenya’s business environment, often providing a forum for dialogue.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

The government provides the right for foreign and domestic private entities to establish and own business enterprises and engage in all forms of remunerative activity. In an effort to encourage foreign investment, the GOK in 2015 repealed regulations that imposed a 75 percent foreign ownership limitation for firms listed on the Nairobi Securities Exchange, allowing such firms to be 100 percent foreign-owned. Also in 2015, the government established regulations requiring Kenyans own at least 15 percent of the share capital of derivatives exchanges, through which derivatives such as options and futures can be traded.

Kenya considered imposing “local content” requirements on foreign investments under the Companies Act (2015), which initially contained language requiring all foreign companies to demonstrate at least 30 percent of shareholding by Kenyan citizens by birth. United States business associations, however, raised concerns over the bill, pointing to its lack of clarity and the possibility such measures could run afoul of Kenya’s commitments under the WTO. After the U.S. government also raised the issue with the Kenyan government, the clause was repealed.

Kenya’s National Information and Communications Technology (ICT) policy guidelines, published in August 2020, increase the requirement for Kenyan ownership in foreign companies providing ICT services from 20% to 30%, and broadens its applicability within the telecommunications, postal, courier, and broadcasting industries. The foreign entities will have 3 years to comply with the increased local equity participation rule. The Mining Act (2016) restricts foreign participation in the mining sector and reserves the acquisition of mineral rights to Kenyan companies, requiring 60 percent Kenyan ownership of mineral dealerships and artisanal mining companies. The Private Security Regulations Act (2016) restricts foreign participation in the private security sector by requiring that at least 25 percent of shares in private security firms be held by Kenyans. The National Construction Authority Act (2011) imposes local content restrictions on “foreign contractors,” defined as companies incorporated outside Kenya or with more than 50 percent ownership by non-Kenyan citizens. The act requires foreign contractors to enter into subcontracts or joint ventures assuring that at least 30 percent of the contract work is done by local firms. Regulations implementing these requirements remain in process. The Kenya Insurance Act (2010) restricts foreign capital investment to two-thirds, with no single person controlling more than 25 percent of an insurers’ capital.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

In 2019, the World Trade Organization conducted a trade policy review for the East Africa Community (EAC), of which Kenya is a member (https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp484_e.htm).

Business Facilitation

In 2011, the GOK established a state agency called KenTrade to address trading partners’ concerns regarding the complexity of trading regulations and procedures. KenTrade is mandated to facilitate cross-border trade and to implement the National Electronic Single Window System. In 2017, KenTrade launched InfoTrade Kenya, located at infotrade.gov.ke, which provides a host of investment products and services to prospective investors in Kenya. The site documents the process of exporting and importing by product, by steps, by paperwork, and by individuals, including contact information for officials’ responsible relevant permits or approvals.

In February 2019, Kenya implemented a new Integrated Customs Management System (iCMS) which includes automated valuation benchmarking, automated release of green-channel cargo, importer validation and declaration, and linkage with iTax. The iCMS features enable Customs to efficiently manage revenue and security related risks for imports, exports and goods on transit and transshipment.

The Movable Property Security Rights Bill (2017) enhanced the ability of individuals to secure financing through movable assets, including using intellectual property rights as collateral. The Nairobi International Financial Centre Act (2017) seeks to provide a legal framework to facilitate and support the development of an efficient and competitive financial services sector in Kenya. The act created the Nairobi Financial Centre Authority to establish and maintain an efficient operating framework to attract and retain firms. The Kenya Trade Remedies Act (2017) provides the legal and institutional framework for Kenya’s application of trade remedies consistent with World Trade Organization (WTO) law, which requires a domestic institution to both receive complaints and undertake investigations in line with the WTO Agreements. To date, however, Kenya has implemented only 7.5 percent of its commitments under the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement, which it ratified in 2015. In 2020, Kenya launched the Kenya Trade Remedies Agency for the investigation and imposition of anti-dumping, countervailing duty, and trade safeguards, to protect domestic industries from unfair trade practices.

The Companies Amendment Act (2017) amended the prior Companies Act clarifying ambiguities in the act and conforms to global trends and best practices. The act amends provisions on the extent of directors’ liabilities, on the extent of directors’ disclosures, and on shareholder remedies to better protect investors, including minority investors. The amended act eliminates the requirement for small enterprises to have lawyers register their firms, the requirement for company secretaries for small businesses, and the need for small businesses to hold annual general meetings, saving regulatory compliance and operational costs.

The Business Registration Services (BRS) Act (2015) established a state corporation known as the Business Registration Service to ensure effective administration of the laws relating to the incorporation, registration, operation and management of companies, partnerships, and firms. The BRS also devolves to the counties business registration services such as registration of business names and promoting local business ideas/legal entities, thus reducing costs of registration. The Companies Act (2015) covers the registration and management of both public and private corporations.

In 2014, the GOK established a Business Environment Delivery Unit to address challenges facing investors in the country. The unit focuses on reducing the bureaucratic steps related to setting up and doing business in the country. Separately, the Business Regulatory Reform Unit operates a website (http://www.businesslicense.or.ke/ ) offering online business registration and providing information on how to access detailed information on additional relevant business licenses and permits, including requirements, costs, application forms, and contact details for the relevant regulatory agency. In 2013, the GOK initiated the Access to Government Procurement Opportunities program, requiring all public procurement entities to set aside a minimum of 30 percent of their annual procurement spending facilitate the participation of youth, women, and persons with disabilities (https://agpo.go.ke/ ).

An investment guide to Kenya, also referred to as iGuide Kenya, can be found at http://www.theiguides.org/public-docs/guides/kenya/about# . iGuides designed by UNCTAD and the International Chamber of Commerce provide investors with up-to-date information on business costs, licensing requirements, opportunities, and conditions in developing countries. Kenya is a member of UNCTAD’s international network of transparent investment procedures.

Outward Investment

The GOK does not promote or incentivize outward investment. Despite this, Kenya is evolving into an outward investor in tourism, manufacturing, retail, finance, education, and media. Outward investment has been focused in the East Africa Community and select central African countries, taking advantage of the EAC preferential access between the EAC member countries. The EAC advocates for free movement of capital across the six member states – Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Kenya’s regulatory system is relatively transparent and continues to improve. Proposed laws and regulations pertaining to business and investment are published in draft form for public input and stakeholder deliberation before their passage into law (http://www.kenyalaw.org/  and http://www.parliament.go.ke/the-national-assembly/house-business/bills-tracker ). Kenya’s business registration and licensing systems are fully digitized and transparent while computerization of other government processes to increase transparency and close avenues for corrupt behavior is ongoing.

The 2010 Kenyan Constitution requires government to incorporate public participation before officials and agencies make certain decisions. The draft Public Participation Bill (2016) would provide the general framework for such public participation. The Ministry of Devolution has produced a guide for counties on how to carry out public participation; many counties have enacted their own laws on public participation. The Environmental Management and Coordination Act (1999) incorporates the principles of sustainable development, including public participation in environmental management. The Public Finance Management Act mandates public participation in the budget cycle. The Land Act, Water Act, and Fair Administrative Action Act (2015) also include provisions providing for public participation in agency actions.

Kenya has regulations to promote inclusion and fair competition when applying for tenders. Executive Order No. 2 of 2018 emphasizes publication of all procurement information including tender notices, contracts awarded, name of suppliers and their directors. The information is published on the Public Procurement Information Portal enhances transparency and accountability (https://www.tenders.go.ke/website). However, the directive is yet to be fully implemented.

Many GOK laws grant significant discretionary and approval powers to government agency administrators, which can create uncertainty among investors. While some government agencies have amended laws or published clear guidelines for decision-making criteria, others have lagged in making their transactions transparent. Work permit processing remains a problem, with overlapping and sometimes contradictory regulations. American companies have complained about delays and non-issuance of permits that appear compliant with known regulations.

International Regulatory Considerations

Kenya is a member state of the East African Community (EAC), and generally applies EAC policies to trade and investment. Kenya operates under the EAC Custom Union Act (2004) and decisions on the tariffs to levy on imports from countries outside the EAC zone are made at the EAC Secretariat level. The U.S. government engages with Kenya on trade and investment issues bilaterally and through the U.S.-EAC Trade and Investment Partnership. Kenya also is a member of COMESA and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD).

According to the Africa Regional Integration Index Report 2019, Kenya is the second best integrated country in Africa and a leader in regional integration policies within the EAC and COMESA regional blocs, with strong performance on regional infrastructure, productive integration, free movement of people, and financial and macro-economic integration. The GOK maintains a Department of East African Community Integration within the Ministry of East Africa and Regional Development. Kenya generally adheres to international regulatory standards. The country is a member of the WTO and provides notification of draft technical regulations to the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). Kenya maintains a TBT National Enquiry Point at http://notifyke.kebs.org . Additional information on Kenya’s WTO participation can be found at https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/kenya_e.htm .

Accounting, legal, and regulatory procedures are transparent and consistent with international norms. Publicly listed companies adhere to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) that have been developed and issued in the public interest by the International Accounting Standards Board. The board is an independent, private sector, not-for-profit organization that is the standard-setting body of the IFRS Foundation. Kenya is a member of UNCTAD’s international network of transparent investment procedures.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

The legal system is based on English Common Law, and the 2010 constitution establishes an independent judiciary with a Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Constitutional Court, and High Court. Subordinate courts include: Magistrates, Khadis (Muslim succession and inheritance), Courts Martial, the Employment and Labor Relations Court (formerly the Industrial Court), and the Milimani Commercial Courts – the latter two of which both have jurisdiction over economic and commercial matters. In 2016, Kenya’s judiciary instituted specialized courts focused on corruption and economic crimes. There is no systematic executive or other interference in the court system that affects foreign investors, however, the courts face allegations of corruption, as well as political manipulation in the form of unjustified budget cuts which significantly impact the ability of the judiciary to deliver on its mandate and delayed confirmation of nominated Judges by the President resulting in an understaffed judiciary and long delays in rendering judgments.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (2012) provides for the enforcement of judgments given in other countries that accord reciprocal treatment to judgments given in Kenya. Kenya has entered into reciprocal enforcement agreements with Australia, the United Kingdom, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Seychelles. Outside of such an agreement, a foreign judgment is not enforceable in the Kenyan courts except by filing a suit on the judgment. Foreign advocates may practice as an advocate in Kenya for the purposes of a specified suit or matter if appointed to do so by the Attorney General. However, foreign advocates are not entitled to practice in Kenya unless they have paid to the Registrar of the High Court of Kenya the prescribed admission fee. Additionally, they are not entitled to practice unless a Kenyan advocate instructs and accompanies them to court. The regulations or enforcement actions are appealable and are adjudicated in the national court system.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Kenya does not have a competition or Anti-Trust policy, however the Competition Act (2010) created the Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK) which covers restrictive trade practices, mergers and takeovers, unwarranted concentrations, and price control. All mergers and acquisitions require the CAK’s authorization before they are finalized, and the CAK regulates abuse of dominant position and other competition and consumer-welfare related issues in Kenya. In 2014, CAK imposed a filing fee for mergers and acquisitions set at one million Kenyan shillings (KSH) (approximately USD 10,000) for mergers involving turnover of between one and KSH 50 billion (up to approximately USD 500 million). KSH two million (approximately USD 20,000) will be charged for larger mergers. Company takeovers are possible if the share buy-out is more than 90 percent, although such takeovers are rarely seen in practice.

Expropriation and Compensation

The 2010 constitution guarantees protection from expropriation, except in cases of eminent domain or security concerns, and all cases are subject to the payment of prompt and fair compensation. The Land Acquisition Act (2010) governs due process and compensation in land acquisition, although land rights remain contentious and can cause significant project delays. However, there are cases where government measures could be deemed indirect expropriation that may impact foreign investment. Companies report an emerging trend in land lease renewal where foreign investors face uncertainty in lease renewals by county governments in instances where the county wants to confiscate some or all of the foreign investor’s project property.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Kenya is a member of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, also known as the ICSID Convention or the Washington Convention, and the 1958 New York Convention on the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. International companies may opt to seek international well-established dispute resolution at the ICSID. Regarding the arbitration of property issues, the Foreign Investments Protection Act (2014) cites Article 75 of the Kenyan Constitution, which provides that “[e]very person having an interest or right in or over property which is compulsorily taken possession of or whose interest in or right over any property is compulsorily acquired shall have a right of direct access to the High Court.” Kenya in 2020 prevailed in an ICSID international arbitration case against WalAm Energy Inc, a U.S./Canadian geothermal company in a geothermal exploration license revocation dispute.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

There have been very few investment disputes involving U.S. and international companies. Commercial disputes, including those involving government tenders, are more common. There are different bodies established to settle investment disputes. The National Land Commission (NLC) settles land related disputes; the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board settles procurement and tender related disputes, and the Tax Appeals Tribunal settles tax disputes. However, the private sector cites weak institutional capacity, inadequate transparency, and inordinate delays in dispute resolution in lower courts. The resources and time involved in settling a dispute through the Kenyan courts often render them ineffective as a form of dispute resolution.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The government does accept binding international arbitration of investment disputes with foreign investors. The Kenyan Arbitration Act (1995) as amended in 2010 is anchored entirely on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law. Legislation introduced in 2013 established the Nairobi Centre for International Arbitration (NCIA), which seeks to serve as an independent, not-for-profit international organization for commercial arbitration, and may offer a quicker alternative to the court system. In 2014, the Kenya Revenue Authority launched an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism aiming to provide taxpayers with an alternative, fast-track avenue for resolving tax disputes.

Transcription of Court Proceedings in the Commercial and Tax Division

The Kenyan Judiciary reported in its 2018-2019 State of the Judiciary and Administration Report that it had commenced its court recording and transcription project with the installation of recording equipment in six courtrooms in the Commercial and Tax Division in Nairobi. The project will significantly speed up the hearing of cases as judges will no longer be required to record proceedings by hand.

Court Annexed Mediation and Small Claims Courts

The National Council on the Administration of Justice spearheaded legislative reforms to accommodate mediation in the formal court process as well as introduce small claims courts to expedite resolution of commercial cases. The Judiciary reported in its State of the Judiciary Address (2018-2019), that the Mediation Accreditation Committee accredited 645 mediators that were handling a total of 411 commercial matters during the reporting period. Additionally, the Judiciary reported that disputes with a total value of over three billion Kenyan shillings (KSH) (approximately USD 30,000,000) had been resolved through Court Annexed Mediation during the reporting period. Court Annexed Mediation serves as an effective case resolution mechanism that will significantly reduce pressure on the justice system and eventually result in expeditious determination of commercial cases.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The Insolvency Act (2015) modernized the legal framework for bankruptcies. Its provisions generally correspond to those of the United Nations’ Model Law on Cross Border Insolvency. The act promotes fair and efficient administration of cross-border insolvencies to protect the interests of all creditors and other interested persons, including the debtor. The act repeals the Bankruptcy Act (2012) and updates the legal structure relating to insolvency of natural persons and incorporated and unincorporated bodies. Section 720 of the Insolvency Act (2015) grants the force of law to the UNCITRAL Model Law.

Creditors’ rights are comparable to those in other common law countries, and monetary judgments typically are made in Kenyan shillings. The Insolvency Act (2015) increased the rights of borrowers and prioritizes the revival of distressed firms. The law states that a debtor will automatically be discharged from debt after three years. Bankruptcy is not criminalized in Kenya. Kenya moved up 6 ranks in the World Bank Group’s Doing Business 2020 report, moving to 50 of 190 countries in the “resolving insolvency” category.

Real Property

The 2010 Constitution prohibits foreigners or foreign owned firms from owning freehold interest in land in Kenya. However, unless classified as agricultural, there are no restrictions on foreign-owned companies leasing land or real estate. The cumbersome and opaque process to acquire land raises concerns about security of title, particularly given past abuses relating to the distribution and redistribution of public land. The Land (Extension and Renewal of Leases) Rules (2017) stopped the automatic renewal of leases and tied renewals to the economic output of the land that must be beneficial to the economy. If property legally purchased remains unoccupied, the property ownership can revert to other occupiers, including squatters. Privately-owned land comprised six percent of the total land area in 1990; government land was about 20 percent of the total and included national parks, forest land and alienated and un-alienated land. Trust land is the most extensive type of tenure, comprising 64 percent of the total land area in 1990.

The 2010 Constitution and subsequent land legislation created the National Land Commission, an independent government body mandated to review historical land injustices and provide oversight of government land policy and management. This had the unintended side effect of introducing coordination and jurisdictional confusion between the commission and the Ministry of Lands mainly fueled by land interests by the political class. In 2015, President Kenyatta commissioned the new National Titling Center with a promise to increase the 5.6 million title deeds issued since independence to 9 million. From 2013 to 2018, an additional 4.5 million title deeds have been issued, however 70 percent of land in Kenya remained untitled. Land grabbing resulting from double registration of titles remains prevalent. Property legally purchased but unoccupied can revert ownership to other parties.

Mortgages and liens exist in Kenya, but the recording system is not reliable – Kenya has only some 24,000 recorded mortgages in a country of 47.6 million people – and there are often complaints of property rights and interests not being enforced. The legal infrastructure around land ownership and registration has changed in recent years, and land issues have delayed several major infrastructure projects. Kenya’s 2010 Constitution required all land leases to convert from 999 years to 99 years, giving the state the power to review leasehold land at the expiry of the 99 years, deny lease renewal, and confiscate the land if it determines the land has not been used productively. The constitution also converted foreign-owned freehold interests into 99-year leases at a nominal “peppercorn rate” sufficient to satisfy the requirements for the creation of a legal contract. The GOK has not yet effectively implemented this provision. In July 2020, the Ministry of Lands and Physical planning released draft electronic land registration regulations (2020) to guide the e-transaction of land. The Ministry together with the National Land Commission agreed to commence the e-transaction on land matters pending resolution of outstanding issues.

Intellectual Property Rights

The major intellectual property enforcement issues in Kenya related to counterfeit products are corruption, lack of penalty enforcement, failure to impound imports of counterfeit goods at the ports of entry, and reluctance of brand owners to file a complaint with the Anti-Counterfeit Agency (ACA). The prevalence of “gray market” products – genuine products that enter the country illegally without paying import duties – also presents a challenge, especially in the mobile phone and computer sectors. Copyright piracy and the use of unlicensed software are also emerging challenges.

The Presidential Task Force on Parastatal Reforms (2013) proposed that the three intellectual property agencies, namely: the Kenya Industrial Property Institute (KIPI), the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) and the Anti-Counterfeit Authority (ACA) be merged into one Government Owned Entity (GOE). A task force on the merger comprising staff from KIPI, ACA, KECOBO, the Ministry of Industrialization, Trade and Enterprise Development is drafting the instruments of the merger which has led to a draft GOE named Intellectual Property Office of Kenya (IPOK) and has also drafted Intellectual Property Office Bill, 2020 for establishing IPOK. In an attempt to combat the import of counterfeits, the Ministry of Industrialization and the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS) decreed in 2009 that all locally-manufactured goods must have a KEBS standardization mark. Several categories of imported goods, specifically food products, electronics, and medicines, must have an import standardization mark (ISM). Under this program, U.S. consumer-ready products may enter the Kenyan market without altering the U.S. label but must also carry an ISM. Once the product qualifies for a Confirmation of Conformity, KEBS will issue the ISM free of charge. From time to time KEBS and the Anti-Counterfeit Agency conduct random seizures of counterfeit imports but there is no clear database of seizures kept.

Kenya is not included on the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see the World Intellectual Property Organization’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

The Government of Mali encourages foreign investment.  In general, the law treats foreign and domestic investment equally.  In practice, U.S. investors report facing many of the same challenges as other foreign investors do, including allegedly unfair application of tax collection laws, difficulties clearing goods through customs, and requests for bribes.  Corruption in the judiciary is common and foreign companies may find themselves at a disadvantage vis-à-vis Malian investors in enforcing contracts and competing for public procurement tenders.

The Malian government has instituted policies promoting direct investment and export-oriented businesses.  Foreign investors go through the same screening process as domestic investors.  Criteria for authorizing an investment under Mali’s 2012 investment code include the size of the proposed capital investment, the use of locally produced raw materials, and the level of job creation.

Mali’s Investment Promotion Agency (API-Mali) serves as a one-stop shop for prospective investors and serves both Malian and foreign enterprises of all sizes.  API-Mali’s website (https://apimali.gov.ml/ ) provides information on business registration, investment opportunities, tax incentives, and other topics relevant to prospective investors.

Mali maintains an office in charge of business climate reform (Cellule Technique des Réformes du Climat des Affaires or CTRCA).  Since 2015, Mali has also had a committee for monitoring business environment reforms that includes both government and private sector members.  Mali adopted a law governing public-private partnerships (PPPs) in 2016 and has a dedicated PPP unit charged with reviewing and facilitating implementation of PPP projects in a multitude of sectors.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish and own business enterprises with no restriction to forms of remunerative activities.  There are some specific limits on ownership in the mining and media sector:  Malian law requires that the owners and primary shareholders of media companies be Malian nationals.  Foreign investors in the mining sector can own up to 90 percent of a mining company.  The West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), of which Mali is a member, requires Malian and foreign companies to report if they will hold foreign currency reserves in their Malian business accounts and to receive approval from the Ministry of Economy and Finances and from the Central Bank for West African States (BCEAO).

Other Investment Policy Reviews

The World Trade Organization (WTO) reviewed the trade and investment policies of WAEMU members, including Mali, in 2017.  The review can be accessed at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp462_e.htm .

Business Facilitation

Mali’s Investment Promotion Agency, API-Mali (https://apimali.gov.ml/ ), serves as a one-stop shop to facilitate both foreign and local investment.  In 2020, the World Bank’s Doing Business Report ranked Mali 124th out of 190 countries for ease of starting a business (a separate indicator that feeds into the overall ease of doing business ranking).  The 2020 Doing Business Report estimates that it takes an average of 11 days and five separate administrative procedures to register a firm.  There is no discrimination based on gender, age, or ethnicity in the process of business registration.

Foreign companies wishing to register in Mali may receive tax and customs benefits depending on the size of investment.  Small and medium-sized enterprises (for which there is no common definition across Government of Mali entities) are also eligible for some fiscal advantages.

Outward Investment

The Government of Mali has no policy to promote outward investment.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

As reflected in agreements with the IMF and World Bank, the Government of Mali has adopted a generally transparent regulatory policy and laws to foster competition.  Mali’s laws related to commerce, labor, and competition are designed to meet the requirements of fair competition, ease bureaucratic procedures, and facilitate the hiring and firing of employees.  In practice, however, many international firms complain of lack of transparency in the regulatory system and challenges in enforcing regulatory requirements to the detriment of business prospects.  There is no public comment period or other opportunity for citizens or businesses to comment upon proposed laws.

Mali is a member of UNCTAD’s international network of transparent investment procedures.  Mali is also a member of the African Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law (OHADA) and implements the Accounting System of West African States (SYSCOA), which harmonizes business practices among several African countries consistent with international norms.  There are no informal regulatory processes managed by nongovernmental organizations or associations.

Mali’s Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (Autorité de régulation des marchés publics or ARMDS) is tasked with ensuring transparency in public procurement projects and may receive complaints from businesses on public procurement-related issues.  ARMDS publishes information about its decisions in disputes as well as key laws relating to public procurement on its website at http://www.armds.ml/ .

The Government of Mali regularly reviews regulations in order to adapt them to the current national context or to international standards or commitments.  A new mining code that will apply to future mining projects was announced in 2019 but has yet to be formally adopted as law.  Reforms to the tax code, the investment code, and petroleum product pricing are ongoing.

Mali makes public finance documents, including the budgets for all government ministries and offices, available on the Ministry of Economy and Finances’ website at https://www.finances.gouv.ml/lois-des-finances .  Mali’s national budget provides details on the expenditures of government entities (including the Presidency and Prime Minister’s office) and the revenues of tax collection authorities, including customs, the public debt directorate, the land administration directorate, and the treasury and public accounting directorate.  The budget also includes information on public debt, as well as government subsidies to petroleum products and to the state-owned utility company (Energie du Mali or EDM).  The Government of Mali also publishes a simplified version of the budget known as the citizen’s budget.

The Government of Mali has multiple audit institutions tasked with monitoring public spending.  The Accounts Section of the Supreme Court is responsible for reviewing and approving the financial statements of all Government of Mali departments.  The Office of the Auditor General (Bureau du Verificateur General or BVG) is authorized to audit the accounts of all government entities as well as private companies or other entities that receive public funds.  Its reports are made public and can be accessed at http://www.bvg-mali.org/ .  The Government of Mali has other auditing institutions, including the Office to Fight against Illicit Enrichment (Office central de Lutte contre l’Enrichissement illicite or OCLEI), the General Comptroller of Public Services (Contrôle Général des Services Publics or CGSP), and the Support Unit for Administrative Auditing Bodies (Cellule d’Appui aux Structures de Contrôle de l’Administration or CASCA).  Despite the existence of multiple audit institutions, management of public funds remains opaque and subject to corrupt practices, particularly in public procurements.  In 2019, the Department of State determined that Mali did not meet the minimum requirements of fiscal transparency.

International Regulatory Considerations

As a member of WAEMU and ECOWAS, Mali applies WAEMU and ECOWAS directives.

Mali is a member of the WTO.  Mali has not notified the WTO of any measures concerning investments related to trade in goods that are inconsistent with the requirements of Trade Related Investment Measures.  Information on other notifications from Mali to the WTO can be found at https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/mali_e.htm  under the “Notifications from Mali” section.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Mali’s legal system is based on French civil law.  Mali uses its investment code, mining code, commerce code, labor code, and code on competition and price to govern disputes.  Disputes occasionally arise between the government or state-owned enterprises and foreign companies.  Some investors report that certain cases involve wrongdoing on the part of corrupt government officials.

Although Mali’s judicial system is independent, many companies have noted that it is subject to political influence.  Numerous business complaints are awaiting an outcome in the courts.  The Minister of Justice wields influence over the career paths of judges and prosecutors, which may compromise their independence.  Corruption in the judicial system is common, leading to what foreign investors have characterized as flawed decisions.

An independent commercial court was established in 1991 with the encouragement of the U.S. government to expedite the handling of business litigation.  Commercial courts, located in Bamako, Kayes, and Mopti, can hear intellectual property rights cases.  In areas where there is no commercial court, the local Courts of First Instance have the jurisdiction to hear business disputes.  The Courts of First Instance’s decisions are appealable in the Court of Appeal and/or in the Supreme Court.  Since its inception, the commercial court has handled cases involving foreign companies.  The court is staffed by magistrates and is assisted by elected Malian Chamber of Commerce and Industry representatives.  Teams composed of one magistrate and two Chamber of Commerce and Industry representatives conduct hearings.  The magistrate’s role is to ensure that the court renders decisions in accordance with applicable commercial laws, including internationally recognized bankruptcy laws, and that court decisions are enforced under Malian law.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Mali’s investment code gives the same incentives to both domestic and foreign companies for licensing, procurement, tax and customs duty deferrals, export and import policies, and export zone status if the firm exports at least 80 percent of production.  Incentives include exemptions from duties on imported equipment and machinery.  Investors may also receive tax exemptions on the use of local raw materials.  In addition, foreign companies can negotiate specific incentives on a case-by-case basis.  The Government of Mali has reduced or eliminated many export taxes and import duties as part of ongoing economic reforms; however, export taxes remain for gold and cotton, Mali’s two primary exports.  The government applies price controls to petroleum products and cotton, and occasionally to other commodities (such as rice) on a case-by-case basis.

In most cases, foreign investors may own 100 percent of any business they create, except in the mining and media sectors.  Foreign investors may also purchase shares in parastatal companies.  Foreign companies may also start joint-venture operations with Malian enterprises.  The repatriation of capital and profit is guaranteed.

Despite having a generally favorable investment regime on paper, foreign investors have complained of facing challenges in practice, including limited access to financing, high levels of corruption, poor infrastructure (including inconsistent electricity access), a non-transparent judicial system, and the lack of an educated workforce.

The following websites provide additional information relating to investments in Mali:

Investment Promotion Agency:  https://apimali.gov.ml/  and http://mali.eregulations.org/ 
Mali Trade Portal:  https://tradeportal.ml/ 
National Council of Employers:  http://www.cnpmali.org/index.php/lois-et-reglements/codes 
Niger River Authority (Officer du Niger):  https://www.on-mali.org/on/ 
Chamber of Commerce and Industry:  http://www.cci.ml 
Ministry of Economy and Finances:  http://www.finances.gouv.ml 
Public Procurement Regulatory Authority:  http://www.armds.ml/ 

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The Ministry of Commerce and Industry is responsible for reviewing free competition in the Malian market place.  Mali’s national competition law (Order 2007, Decree 2008) and the WAEMU 2002 anti-trust rules are the primary judicial documents that govern competition in Mali.  The commercial court (Tribunal of Commerce) and ARMDS are the primary judicial bodies that oversee competition-related concerns.

Mali’s Organization of Industrial Entrepreneurs (Organisation Patronal des Industriels or OPI) has criticized corruption and smuggling as significant hurdles to fair competition.  Contacts report that Mali struggles to limit illegal imports of products such as sodas, juices, tobacco, medicines, and textiles (including fabrics).  The General Directorate of Customs, the National Directorate for Commerce and Competition, and the Agency for the Sanitary Security of Foods occasionally intervene to address the import and commercialization of smuggled goods but have limited capacity to effectively address the problem.

Expropriation and Compensation

Expropriation of private property other than land for public purposes is rare.  The Malian government has not unfairly targeted U.S. firms for expropriation.  By Malian law, the expropriation process should be public and transparent and follow the principles of international law.  Compensation based on market value is awarded by court decision.

The government may exercise eminent domain in various situations, including when undertaking large-scale public projects, in cases of bankrupt companies that had a government guarantee for their financing, or when a company has not complied with the requirements of an investment agreement with the government.

In cases of illegal expropriations, Malian law affords claimants due process in principle.  However, given reported corruption in the land administration sector, impartial adjudication of court cases involving land disputes is rare.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Mali is a member of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).  Malian law (Decree No. 09/P-CMLN promulgating Order No. 77-63/CMLN of November 11, 1977 and Order No. 77-63/CMLN) authorizes implementation of the ICSID Convention.  Mali is also a signatory of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention).

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Investors engaged in disputes with the state are supposed to undertake amicable negotiations before engaging Mali’s Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (ARMDS) or the courts.  Failure to reach an out-of-court agreement will lead to the case being transferred to the Court of First Instance, the commercial court, or international arbitration.  The decisions of foreign courts are enforced as long as specified and recognized by Malian law.

Mali’s investment code allows a foreign company that has a signed agreement with the government to refer to international arbitration any case that the local courts are unable to resolve.  Mali’s 2019 mining code (which has yet to be fully adopted as law) specifies that if there is a disagreement between the Malian government and a mining company related to application of the mining code, the disagreement may be referred to Malian courts, regional courts, and international courts.

Investors have reported that the dispute resolution process is often unfair, cumbersome, and time-consuming.  Dispute resolution can take multiple years and is reportedly often fraught with corruption, political influence, and demands for payments to facilitate the legal process.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Mali is a member of the African Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law (OHADA) and has ratified the 1993 treaty creating the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration.  OHADA has a provision allowing litigation between foreign companies and domestic companies or with the government to be tried in an appellate court outside of Mali.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Mali’s bankruptcy law is found in its commerce code, which does not criminalize bankruptcy.   According to the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report, resolving insolvency takes 3.6 years on average and costs 18 percent of the debtor’s estate.  Generally, a bankrupt company will be sold piecemeal.  The average recovery rate is 28.3 cents on the dollar.

Real Property

Property rights are protected under Malian law.  Ownership of property is defined by the use, the profitability, and the ability of the owner to sell or donate the property.  According to the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report, registering property in Mali requires five steps, takes 29 days, and costs 11.1 percent of the property value on average.  Mali scored 8 (against 8.8 for other Sub-Saharan African countries and 23 for OECD countries) on the quality of land administration index (with 0 being the worst score and 30 the best).

The Government of Mali established the Malian Center for the Promotion of Industrial Property to implement property rights protection laws, including the WTO TRIPS agreements.  The Malian Center for the Promotion of Industrial Property is a member of the African Property Rights Organization and works with international agencies recognized by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization.  Patents, copyrights, and trademarks are covered under property rights protection laws.  These structures notwithstanding, property rights are not always adequately protected in practice.

Mali’s National Land Agency (Direction Nationale des Domaines et du Cadastre or DNDC) defines three types of land property classifications in Mali:  1. a land title (le titre foncier), which gives full property ownership to an individual; 2. an occupancy permit (permis d’occuper) that can be obtained by paying a fee and does not grant full ownership; and 3. farming rights granted to rural agricultural communities.  All non-registered land belongs to the state.  Various government officials, including prefects, mayors, governors, and officials from the Ministry of Lands, are able to grant land ownership status.

Mali currently lacks a nationwide land registry, and different government structures at the local, regional, and national level are involved in land administration.  As a result, there are often competing claims for land.  In March 2020, as part of efforts to improve land management, the Government of Mali began the process of adopting a new law to create a one-stop shop for land registration, eliminate rural land titles (concession rurale), reinforce traditional land rights (droit coutumier), and enable the Minister of Lands to cancel the attribution or confiscation of public properties.

Intellectual Property Rights

Mali is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).  Mali has ratified a number of international treaties related to intellectual property rights (IPR).  There are two primary agencies involved with the protection of IPR in Mali:  the Malian Office of the Rights of the Author (Bureau Malien du Droit d’Auteur or BUMDA) and the Malian Center for the Promotion of Intellectual Property (Centre Malien de Promotion de la Propriété Intellectuelle or CEMAPI).  CEMAPI is the primary agency for patents and for industrial property rights violation claims, while BUMDA covers artistic and cultural works.  In addition to registering copyrights, BUMDA conducts random searches during which it seizes and destroys counterfeit products.  Mali’s Agency for the Sanitary Security of Foods, the National Directorate of Agriculture, and the National Directorate for Commerce and Competition are also charged with enforcing laws related to fair trade, fair competition, and IPR.

In general, however, the government has limited capacity to combat IPR violations or to seize counterfeit goods.  There is a significant number of reported IPR violations in the artistic sector as well as in the pharmaceutical sector.  According to the Malian National Pharmaceutical Association, nearly 50 percent of pharmaceuticals sold in Mali are counterfeit.  Many CDs, movies, and books are reported to be pirated.  Several companies have noted that children are often involved in selling counterfeit products such as clothes, CDs, and books.  In the past, counterfeit products were typically imported from foreign cities, including Guangzhou and Dubai.  However, BUMDA has reported that counterfeit products increasingly originate in Mali and Nigeria.

Mali is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

The Government of Niger is committed to attracting FDI and has repeatedly pledged to take whatever steps necessary to encourage the development of its private sector and increase trade.  The country offers numerous investment opportunities, particularly in agriculture, livestock, energy, telecommunication, industry, infrastructure, hydrocarbons, services, and mining.  In the past several years, new investor codes have been implemented (the most recent being in 2014), the Public-Private Partnership law was adopted in 2018 and subsequently implemented.  Transparency has improved, and customs and taxation procedures have been simplified.  There are no laws that specifically discriminate against foreign and/or U.S. investors.  The government of Niger has demonstrated a willingness to negotiate with prospective foreign investors on matters of taxation and customs.

The Investment Code adopted in 2014 guarantees the reception and protection of foreign direct investment, as well as tax advantages available for investment projects.  The Investment Code allows tax exemptions for a certain period and according to the location and amount of the projects to be negotiated on a case-by-case basis with the Ministry of Commerce.  The code guarantees fair treatment of investors regardless of their origin.  The code also offers tax incentives for sectors that the government deems to be priorities and strategic, including energy production, agriculture, fishing, social housing, health, education, crafts, hotels, transportation, and the agro-food industry.  The code allows free transfer of profits and free convertibility of currencies.

The Public-Private Partnership law adopted in 2018 gives such projects total exemption from duties and taxes, including Value Added Tax (VAT), on the provision of services , works and services directly contributing to the realization of the project in the design and/or implementation phase.  Parts, spare parts, and raw materials intended for projects do not benefit from a duty exemption and customs taxes unless they are not available at Niger.  In the design and/or production phase, private public partnerships benefit from free registration of agreements and all acts entered by the contracting authority and the contracting partner within the framework of the project.

Despite having regulations in place to invite FDI, Niger’s enforcement of its tax code is not always even.  In 2018 and 2019, at least two notable foreign investors complained of unfair tax enforcement or policies.

There are no laws or practices that discriminate against foreign investors including U.S. investors.

The High Council for Investment of Niger (HCIN), created in 2017, reports directly to the President of the Republic.  HCIN is the GoN’s platform for public-private dialogue and has a goal of increasing Foreign Direct Investments, improving Niger’s business environment, and defining private sector priorities to possible investors.

In 2018, Niger’s government reviewed the HCIN’s mission as related to international best practices on attracting FDI.  Subsequently the GoN added, by Presidential Decree, a Nigerien Agency for the Promotion of Private Investment and Strategic Projects (ANPIPS).  It reports to the HCIN and is the implementing agency of HCIN’s policy initiatives.  To date the two agencies have successfully completed a number of investment agreements, notably with Chinese and Turkish firms.  In 2018, it assisted representatives from an American firm in gaining access to Niger and arranging meetings with appropriate government officials.

To improve business climate indicators, the GoN created an Institutional Framework for Improving Business Climate Indicators Office (Dispositif Institutionnel d’Amélioration et de Suivi du Climat des Affaires), within the Ministry of Commerce.  Its stated goal is to create a regulatory framework that permits the implementation of sustainable reforms.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish and own business enterprises.  Energy, mineral resources, and national security related sectors restrict foreign ownership and control; otherwise, there are no limitations on ownership or control.  In the extractive industries, any company to which the GoN grants a mining permit must give the GoN a minimum 10 percent share of the company.  This law applies to both foreign and domestic operations.

The GoN reserves the right to require companies exploiting mineral resources to give the GoN up to a 33 percent stake in their Nigerien operations.  Although Ministry of Planning authorization is required, foreign ownership of land is permitted.  In 2015, under the auspices of the Ministry of Commerce, the GoN validated a new Competition and Consumer Protection Law, replacing a 1992 law that was never operational.  Niger also adheres to the Community Competition Law of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) and directives of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) as well as those offered to investors by the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) all of which provide benefits and guarantees to private companies.

The Government of Niger is an active proponent of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, which President Issoufou stated will encourage international investments and ease trade for international investors.

Foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish and own business enterprises.  A legal Investment Code governs most activities except accounting, which the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA) governs.  The Mining Code governs the mining sector and the Petroleum Code governs the petroleum sector, with regulations enforced through their respective ministries.  The investment code guarantees equal treatment of investors regardless of nationality.  Companies are protected against nationalization, expropriation or requisitioning throughout the national territory, except for reasons of public utility.

The state remains the owner of water resources through the Niger Water Infrastructure Corporation (SPEN), which was created in 2001 and is responsible for the management of the state’s hydraulic infrastructure in urban and semi-urban areas, including development, and project management.  Concessions for the use of water and for the exploitation of works and hydraulic installations may be granted to legal persons governed by private law, generally by presidential decree.  However, the day to day work is through the French investor Veolia through the Niger Water Exploitation Company (SEEN).

An investment screening mechanism does not exist under the Investment Code.  The HCIN is a de facto advisory council to the government on any large scale investment.  The HCIN would support investor engagement with appropriate government offices and facilitate meeting any regulatory requirements.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

In the past three years, the government has not undergone any third-party investment policy reviews through a multi-lateral organization.  Neither the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), nor the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has carried out a policy review for Niger.

The World Bank, however, cohosted a roundtable discussion in 2019 with government, civil society, and business representatives to review Niger’s business climate including its investment policies.

https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/ExportFile.aspx?Id=243443&filename=q/WT/TPR/S362R1-07.pdf 

http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/Investment percent20Policy percent20Reviews/Investment-Policy-Reviews.aspx 

Business Facilitation

Niger’s one-stop shop, the Maison de l’Entreprise, is mandated to enhance business facilitation by mainstreaming and simplifying the procedures required to start a business within a single window registration process.

From 2016 to 2019, the cost and time needed to register businesses dropped from 100,000 CFA (about USD190) to 17,500 CFA (about USD33).  Furthermore, the time to obtain construction permits dropped, as well as the cost of access to water and electricity networks.  The GoN also created an e-regulations website (https://niger.eregulations.org/procedure/2/1?l=fr ), which allows for a clear and complete registration process.  Foreign companies may use this website, which lists government agencies with which businesses must register.  The business registration process was down to about 3 days by 2019, from over 14 days in 2016.

The Government maintains a policy of working with international organizations in finding ways to improve its business registration process, which is reflected in its year-over-year improvements in Niger’s Ease of Doing Business Score as measured by the World Bank.  In the 2020 doing business, Niger score 56.8 and ranked at 132 out of 190 economies.

Company registration can be done at the Centre de Formalités des Entreprises (CFE), at the Maison de l’Entreprise, which is designed as a one-stop-shop for registration.  Applicants must file the documents with the Commercial Registry (Registre du Commerce et du Crédit Mobilier – RCCM), which has a representative at the one-stop shop.

At the same location, a company can register for taxes, obtain a tax identification number (Numéro d’Identification Fiscale – NIF), register with social security (Caisse nationale de Sécurité Sociale – CNSS), and with the employment agency (Agence Nationale pour la Promotion de l’Emploi – ANPE).  Employees can be registered with social security at the same location.

When a company registers, the applicant may also request the publication of a notice of company incorporation, a mandatory step, on the Maison de l’Entreprise website: http://mde.ne/spip.php?rubrique10 .  The notice of incorporation can alternatively be published in an official newspaper (journal d’annonces légales).

Outward Investment

The government does not promote outward investment.  The government’s policy objectives, as specified in the second Nigerien Renaissance Program (section 1.2), is the development of international markets, especially that of ECOWAS, for Nigerien exports rather than investment.

The GoN does not restrict domestic investors from investing abroad.  To the contrary, Niger currently has active Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) with Germany and Switzerland.  BITs were signed with Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt, but are not in force.  Niger is eligible to export virtually all marketable goods duty-free in to the U.S. market via the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) system of trade preferences.

Niger does not have a bilateral taxation treaty with the United States.  The United States, however, signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) with WAEMU in 2014.  It includes Niger.  There is no ongoing systemic tax dispute between the government and foreign investors.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

The GoN possesses transparent policies and requisite laws to foster competition on a non-discriminatory basis, but does not enforce them equally, in large part due to corruption and weak governmental systems.  Legal, regulatory, and accounting systems are generally transparent and consistent with international norms.  The Legal Regime – related to the Investment Code, Labor Code and Commercial Acts – applies the provisions of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA).  It also offers free access to public procurement and with moderate transparency in the procedures for awarding contract.

Niger does not have any regulatory processes managed by nongovernmental organizations or private sector associations.  A company in Niger must be entered in the Register of Companies, must obtain a Tax Identification Number (TIN), be registered with the National Social Security Fund (CNSS), and with the National Employment Promotion Agency (ANPE).

There, however, is a large informal sector that does not submit to any of the legal provisions and is not formally regulated.

In general, the National Assembly drafts regulatory guidance which is approved by the executive branch.  For day-to-day operations each ministry or economic sector has separate regulatory agencies.  For example, rule-making and regulatory authorities exist in telecommunication, public procurement and energy, all of which are relevant for foreign businesses, and are exercised at the national level. The law No 2015-58 established the Energy Sector Regulatory Agency, an independent administrative authority, to regulate the energy sector at the national level, but is effective only in major cities. The December 2012 law No 2012-70 created the Telecommunications and Post Office Regulatory Authority (ARTP).  ARTP regulates all aspects of telecommunications operators.  Legal, regulatory, and accounting systems are generally transparent and consistent with international norms. The Legal Regime – related to the Investment Code, Mining Code, Petroleum Code, Labor Code and Commercial Acts – applies the provisions of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa OHADA. It also offers free access to public procurement and transparency in the procedures for awarding contracts.

GoN officials have confirmed their intent to comply with international norms in its legal, regulatory, and accounting systems, but frequently fall short.  Clear procedures are frequently not available.

Draft bills are not always available for public comment, although some organizations, such as the Chamber of Commerce, are invited to offer suggestions during the drafting process.

Niger does not have a centralized online location where key regulatory actions are published but does have a Directorate of National Archives where key regulatory actions are kept in print.  The Directorate is under the Ministry Secretary of Government.

Foreign and national investors, however, can find detailed information on administrative procedures applicable to investment at the following site: http://niger.eregulations.org/ .  The site includes information on income generating operations including the number of steps, name and contact details of the entities and persons in charge of procedures, required documents and conditions, costs, processing time, and legal basis justifying the procedures.

A General Inspectorate of Administrative Governance and the Regional Directorates of Archives are in place to oversee administrative processes.  Their efforts are reinforced by incentives for state employees, unannounced inspections in public administrations, and an introduction of a sign-in system and exchange meetings. No major regulatory system and/or enforcement reforms were announced in 2019.

Regulations are developed via a system of ministerial collaborations and discussions, consultation with the State Council, drafting of the text and passed by the Council of Ministers.  This is followed by discussions in Parliament, approval by the Constitutional Council and finally approved by the President for publication and distribution to interested stakeholders.

Based on the Constitution of 2011, regulatory power belongs to the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister who can issue regulations for the whole of the national territory.  Other administrative authorities also have regulatory power, such as ministers, governors, or prefects and mayors, who have the power of enforcement at the local level.

Ministries or regulatory agencies do not conduct impact assessments of proposed regulations.  However, ministries or regulatory agencies solicit comments on proposed regulations from the general public through public meetings and targeted outreach to stakeholders, such as business associations or other groups.  Public comments are generally not published.

Public finances and debt obligations are not transparent enough; however, the International Monetary Fund and the European Union are funding projects to improve finances and debt transparency in which there is annual review and Niger was assessed to be making progress.

International Regulatory Considerations

Niger is a part of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), a 15-member West African trade block.  National policy generally adheres to ECOWAS guidelines concerning business regulations.

Niger is part of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, which came into affect in July 2019.  Negotiations on Made in Africa and other aspects of the agreement were ongoing at the end of 2019.

Niger is a member of the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development’s international network of transparent investment procedures: http://niger.eregulations.org/  (French language only).

Niger is a member of the WTO, but as a lower income member, is exempt from Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) obligations.  The GoN does not notify all draft technical regulations to the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT).  Niger ratified a Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) in August 2015.  The GoN has reported some progress on implementing the TFA requirements.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Niger’s legal system is a legacy of the French colonial system.  The legal infrastructure is insufficient, making it difficult to use the courts to enforce ownership of property or contracts. While Niger’s laws protect property and commercial rights, the administration of justice can be slow and unequal.

Niger has a written commercial law that is heavily based on the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA).  Niger has been a member of OHADA since 1995.  OHADA aims to harmonize business laws in 16 African countries by adopting common rules adapted to their economies, setting up appropriate judicial procedures, and encouraging arbitration for the settlement of contractual disputes.  OHADA regulations on business and commercial law include definition and classification of legal persons engaged in trade, procedures for credit and recovery of debts, means of enforcement, bankruptcy, receivership, and arbitration.  Niger established Commercial Court in Niamey in 2015.  No statistics are available on the activities of the Commercial Court.

Article 116 of the constitution clearly states that the judicial system is independent of the executive and legislative branches.  However, the personnel management process for assignments and promotions is through politically appointed personnel in the Ministry of Justice, seriously weakening the independence of the judiciary and raising questions about the fairness and reliability of the judicial process.

Regulations or enforcement actions are appealable and adjudicated in the court system.  However, it is extremely rare for individuals or corporations to challenge government regulations or enforcement actions in court due to costs and administrative obstacles.

For example, in 2018, the government initiated tax cases against the telecommunication companies of Orange, Airtel, Moov and Nigertelecom (the state-owned entreprise). Moov, Nigertelecom and Airtel negotiated a settlement.  Orange, a French owned multi-national corporation that provided cell phone and Internet service in Niger challenged the government order through the commerce tribunal and later in the constitutional court.  To begin the process, Orange had to submit 75 percent of the claimed tax discrepancy.  Orange claimed that the charge made it prohibitive for the company to access the courts.  The Constitutional Court determined that if an appeal is successful the government must repay the funds, thus the 75 percent charge is not an obstacle.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Niger offers guarantees to foreign direct investors pertaining to security of capital and investment, compensation for expropriation, and equality of treatment.  Foreign investors may be permitted to transfer income derived from invested capital and from liquidated investments, provided the original investment is made in convertible currencies.

Other than the decisions against Orange, previously described, there were no major laws/regulations or decisions in 2019.  Judicial decisions that have come out in the past years can be found on the Commerce Tribunal of Niamey website: http://www.tribunalcommerceniamey.org/index.php .

Niger does not have a dedicated one-stop shop website for investment, but the Chamber of Commerce and Industry houses a specialized institution, known as the Investment Promotion Center (CPI) which supports domestic and foreign investors in terms of business “creation, extension, and rehabilitation.”  The HCIN and ANPIPS (Agence Nigerienne pour la Promotion des Investissements et Projets Strategiques), which are within the Prime Minister Office, are fully authorized by the GoN to support possible foreign investors.  These two structures may assist investors in using or adhering to Niger’s codes and regulations such as the investment code, the Public-Private-Partnership agreement, the electricity code, and the petroleum code.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

There were no new developments in 2019 related to competition concerns.  Under the auspices of the Ministry of Trade, the GoN in 2015 validated a new Competition and Consumer Protection Law, replacing a 1992 law that was never fully operational.  Niger also adheres to the Community Competition Law of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU).

Expropriation and Compensation

The Investment Code guarantees that no business will be subject to nationalization or expropriation except when deemed “in the public interest” as prescribed by the law.  The code requires that the government compensate any expropriated business with just and equitable payment.  There have been a number of expropriations of commercial and personal property, most of which were not conducted in a manner consistent with Nigerien law requiring “just and prior compensation.”  It is in fact rare for property owners to be compensated by the government after expropriations of property.

There is no record of expropriations of property of international investors.

With the planned construction of the Kandaji Dam beginning in 2019, and in adherence to requirements for donor funding, the government offered to resettle 38,000 individuals and their livestock to new sites.  The government created an agency to conduct all resettlement related activities upstream and downstream of the dam construction.  The agency conducted a census to determine who would be impacted and held public consultations to meet the populations and collect complaints at each step of the process. The process is ongoing, with some individuals expressing concern about the value of compensation and the ability to farm in their new location.

In cases of expropriation carried out by the GoN, claimants and community leaders have alleged a lack of due process.  These complaints are currently limited to community forums and press coverage.  Many of the families impacted, usually those whose land is expropriated for construction projects, lack the knowledge and ability to exercise their rights under the law.  High rates of illiteracy, complexity of the legal system, and lack of resources to retain competent legal counsel present insurmountable barriers to legal remedies for most Nigerien business owners who have had their property expropriated, legal challenges to expropriation are not lodged.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Niger is a contracting state of both the ICSID Convention and the New York Convention of 1958.  There is no domestic legislation providing for enforcement of awards under the 1958 New York Convention and/or under the ICSID Convention.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The Investment Code offers the possibility for foreign nationals to seek remedy through the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes.  Niger does not have a BIT or FTA with the United States that would provide dispute settlement processes.  Over the past 10 years, there were no investment disputes that involved a U.S. person.  Local courts are generally reluctant to recognize foreign arbitral awards issued against the GoN.  Niger does not have a record of extrajudicial actions against foreign investors.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Niger has an operational center for mediation and arbitration of business disputes. The center’s stated aim is to maintain investor confidence by eliminating long and expensive procedures traditionally involved in the resolution of business disputes.

The Investment Code provides for settlement of disputes by arbitration or by recourse to the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Disputes on Investment. However, investment dispute mechanisms in contracts are not always respected.

There was no publicly available information in 2019 on foreign arbitral award enforcement in Niger.  Procedures are in place but are often not adhered to because of a lack of resources and corruption in the judicial system.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Niger has laws related to insolvency and/or bankruptcy. Creditors have the right to object to decisions accepting or rejecting a creditor’s claims and may vote on debtors’ bankruptcy reorganization plans.  However, the creditors’ rights are limited: creditors do not have the right to receive from a reorganized firm as much as they may have received from one that had been liquidated.  Likewise, the law does not require that creditors be consulted on matters pertaining to an insolvency framework following the declaration of bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is not criminalized.

According to data collected by the World Bank’s Doing Business survey, resolving insolvency takes five years on average and costs 18 percent of the debtor’s total assets.  Globally, Niger stands at 114 in the 2020 ranking of 190 economies on the ease of resolving insolvency.  Niger strength of insolvency framework index (0–16) is 9.

Real Property

Interests in property are enforced when the landholder is known, but property disputes are common, particularly involving community-owned land or land in rural areas where customary land titles are still common.  Even in urban centers, such as Niamey, offices responsible  for overseeing construction permits are unable to identify ownership for large swaths of land.  Mortgages are relatively new instruments; Bank Atlantique introduced the first mortgages in 2014.  The bank retains the title to the property until the loan is repaid.

Foreign ownership of land is permitted but requires authorization from the Ministry of Planning.  The 2018 Finance Law changed tax policies on foreign ownership, but was not yet in force at year’s end.  It is unknown how much land does not have clear title and the government does not have a defined effort to register lands at the national level.

Traditional use rights are at the core of land disputes between Nigerien farmers and traditional nomadic herders.  According to data collected by the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business survey conducted in 2019, registering property in Niger requires four procedures, takes 13 days and costs 7.4 percent of the property value.  Globally, Niger stands at 115 in the ranking of 190 economies on the ease of registering property.  In 2014, Niger made transferring property easier by reducing registration fees.

Intellectual Property Rights

As a signatory to the 1983 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, Niger provides national protection under Nigerien patent and trademark laws to foreign businesses. Niger is also a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and a signatory to the Universal Copyright Convention.

No new  intellectual property rights, laws or regulations have been enacted in the past year.  Niger does not regularly track and report on seizures of counterfeit goods. There is no specific information about working conditions in the production or sale of counterfeit goods. While there have been some  seizures, government statistics are not available.

Niger is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

The Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) Act of 1995 dismantled controls and limits on FDI, allowing for 100 percent foreign ownership in all sectors, except the petroleum sector where FDI is limited to joint ventures or production-sharing contracts.  It also created the NIPC with a mandate to encourage and assist investment in Nigeria.  The NIPC features a One-Stop Investment Center (OSIC) that nominally includes participation of 27 governmental and parastatal agencies (not all of which are physically present at the OSIC) to consolidate and streamline administrative procedures for new businesses and investments.  Foreign investors receive largely the same treatment as domestic investors in Nigeria, including tax incentives.  The NIPC’s ability to attract new investment has been limited because of the unresolved challenges to investment and business.

The Nigerian government continues to promote import substitution policies such as trade restrictions, foreign exchange restrictions, and local content requirements in a bid to attract investment that would develop domestic production capacity and services that would otherwise be imported.  The import bans and high tariffs used to advance Nigeria’s import substitution goals have been undermined by smuggling of targeted products (most notably rice and poultry) through the country’s porous borders, and by corruption in the import quota systems developed by the government to incentivize domestic investment.  The government began closing land borders to commercial trade in August 2019 to try and curb smuggling.  Investors generally find Nigeria a difficult place to do business despite the government’s stated goal to attract investment.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

There are currently no limits on foreign control of investments; however, Nigerian regulatory bodies may insist on domestic equity as a prerequisite to doing business.  The NIPC Act of 1995 liberalized the ownership structure of business in Nigeria allowing foreign investors to own and control 100 percent of the shares in any company except the petroleum industry.  Ownership prior to the NIPC Act was limited to a 60/40 percentage in favor of majority Nigeria control.   The foreign control of investments applies to all industries minus a few exceptions.  Investment in the oil and gas sector is limited to joint ventures or production-sharing agreements.  Laws also control investment in the production of items critical to national security (i.e. firearms, ammunition, and military and paramilitary apparel) to domestic investors.  Foreign investors must register with the NIPC after incorporation under the Companies and Allied Matters Decree of 1990.  The NIPC Act prohibits the nationalization or expropriation of foreign enterprises except in case of national interest.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

The OECD completed an investment policy review of Nigeria in 2015. (http://www.oecd.org/countries/nigeria/oecd-investment-policy-reviews-nigeria-2015-9789264208407-en.htm ).  The WTO published a trade policy review of Nigeria in 2017, which also includes a brief overview and assessment of Nigeria’s investment climate.  That review is available at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp456_e.htm .

The United Nations Council on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) published an investment policy review of Nigeria and a Blue Book on Best Practice in Investment Promotion and Facilitation in 2009 (available at unctad.org ).  The recommendations from its reports continue to be valid:  Nigeria needs to diversify FDI away from the oil and gas sector by improving the regulatory framework, investing in physical and human capital, taking advantage of regional integration and reviewing external tariffs, fostering linkages and local industrial capacity, and strengthening institutions dealing with investment and related issues.  NIPC and the Federal Inland Revenue Service published a compendium of investment incentives which is available online at https://nipc.gov.ng/compendium .

Business Facilitation

Although the NIPC offers the OSIC, Nigeria does not have an online single window business registration website, as noted by Global Enterprise Registration (www.GER.co ).  The Nigerian Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) maintains an information portal and in 2018 the Trade Ministry launched an online portal for investors called “iGuide Nigeria” (https://theiguides.org/public-docs/guides/nigeria ).  Many steps for business registration can be completed online, but the final step requires submitting original documents to a CAC office to complete registration.  On average, a foreign-owned limited liability company (LLC) in Nigeria (Lagos) can be established in 10 days through eight steps.  This average is significantly faster than the 23-day average for Sub-Saharan Africa.  Timing may vary in different parts of the country.  Only a local legal practitioner accredited by the CAC can incorporate companies in Nigeria.  According to the Nigerian Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, foreign capital invested in an LLC must be imported through an authorized dealer, which will issue a Certificate of Capital Importation.  This certificate entitles the foreign investor to open a bank account in foreign currency.  Finally, a company engaging in international trade must get an import-export license from the Nigerian Customs Service (NCS).

Although not online, the OSIC co-locates relevant government agencies to provide more efficient and transparent services to investors.  The OSIC assists with visas for investors, company incorporation, business permits and registration, tax registration, immigration, and customs issues.  Investors may pick up documents and approvals that are statutorily required to establish an investment project in Nigeria.  The Nigerian government has not established uniform definitions for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) with different agencies using different definitions, so the process may vary from one company to another.

Outward Investment

The Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC) administered an Export Expansion Grant (EEG) scheme to improve non-oil export performance, but the government suspended the program in 2014 due to concerns about corruption on the part of companies that collected grants but did not actually export.  The program was revised and re-launched in 2018 when the federal government set aside 5.12 billion naira (roughly USD 14.2 million) in the 2019 budget for the EEG scheme.  The Nigerian Export-Import (NEXIM) Bank provides commercial bank guarantees and direct lending to facilitate export sector growth, although these services are underused.  NEXIM’s Foreign Input Facility provides normal commercial terms of three to five years (or longer) for the importation of machinery and raw materials used for generating exports.

Agencies created to promote industrial exports remain burdened by uneven management, vaguely defined policy guidelines, and corruption.  Nigeria’s inadequate power supply and lack of infrastructure coupled with the associated high production costs leave Nigerian exporters at a significant disadvantage.  Many Nigerian businesses fail to export because they find meeting international packaging and safety standards is too difficult or expensive.  Similarly, firms often are unable to meet consumer demand for a consistent supply of high-quality goods in sufficient quantities to support exports and meet domestic demand.  Most Nigerian manufacturers remain unable to or uninterested in competing in the international market,  given the size of Nigeria’s domestic market.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Nigeria’s legal, accounting, and regulatory systems comply with international norms, but application and enforcement remain uneven.  Opportunities for public comment and input into proposed regulations sometimes occur.  Professional organizations set standards for the provision of professional services, such as accounting, law, medicine, engineering, and advertising.  These standards usually comply with international norms.  No legal barriers prevent entry into these sectors.

Ministries and regulatory agencies develop and make public anticipated regulatory changes or proposals and publish proposed regulations before their application.  The general public has opportunity to comment through targeted outreach, including business groups and stakeholders, and during the public hearing process before a bill becomes law.  There is no specialized agency tasked with publicizing proposed changes and the time period for comment may vary.  Ministries and agencies do conduct impact assessments, including environmental, but assessment methodologies may vary.  The National Bureau of Statistics reviews regulatory impact assessments conducted by other agencies.  Laws and regulations are publicly available.

Fiscal management occurs at all three tiers of government: federal, 36 state governments and Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja, and 774 local government areas (LGAs).  Revenues from oil and non-oil sources are collected into the federation account and then shared among the different tiers of government by the Federal Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) in line with a statutory sharing formula.  All state governments can collect internally generated revenues, which vary from state to state.  The fiscal federalism structure does not compel states to be accountable to the federal government or transparent about revenues generated or received from the federation account.  The federal government’s finances are more transparent as budgets are made public and the financial data are published by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Debt Management Office (DMO), the Budget Office of the Federation, and the National Bureau of Statistics.  The state-owned oil company’s (Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation) financial data is very opaque.

The DMO puts Nigeria’s total debt stock at USD 84 billion as of December 2019 – USD 27.7 billion or nearly 33 percent of which is external.  The total debt figures presented by the DMO usually do not include off-balance-sheet financing such as sovereign guarantees.

International Regulatory Considerations

Foreign companies operate successfully in Nigeria’s service sectors, including telecommunications, accounting, insurance, banking, and advertising.  The Investment and Securities Act of 2007 forbids monopolies, insider trading, and unfair practices in securities dealings.  Nigeria is not a party to the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).  Nigeria generally regulates investment in line with the WTO’s Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) Agreement, but the government’s local content requirements in the oil and gas sector and the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector may conflict with Nigeria’s commitments under TRIMS.

In 2013, the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), under the auspices of the Ministry of Communication, issued the Guidelines for Nigerian Content Development in the ICT sector.  The Guidelines require original ICT equipment manufacturers, within three years from the effective date of the guidelines, to use 50 percent local manufactured content and to use Nigerian companies to provide 80 percent of value added on networks.  The Guidelines also require multinational companies operating in Nigeria to source all hardware products locally; all government agencies to procure all computer hardware only from NITDA-approved original equipment manufacturers; and ICT companies to host all consumer and subscriber data locally, use only locally manufactured SIM cards for telephone services and data, and to use indigenous companies to build cell towers and base stations.  Enforcement of the Guidelines is largely inconsistent.  The Nigerian government generally lacks capacity and resources to monitor labor practices, technology compliancy, and digital data flows.  There are reports that individual Nigerian companies periodically lobby the National Assembly and/or NITDA to address allegations (warranted or not) against foreign firms that they are in non-compliance with the Guidelines.

The goal is to promote development of domestic production of ICT products and services for the Nigerian and global markets, but the guidelines pose risks to foreign investment and U.S. companies by interrupting their global supply chain, increasing costs, disrupting global flow of data, and stifling innovative products and services.  Industry representatives remain concerned about whether the guidelines would be implemented in a fair and transparent way toward all Nigerian and foreign companies.  All ICT companies, including Nigerian companies, use foreign manufactured equipment as Nigeria does not have the capacity to supply ICT hardware that meets international standards.

Nigeria is a member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which implemented a Common External Tariff (CET) beginning in 2015 with a five-year phase in period.  An internal CET implementation committee headed by the Fiscal Policy/Budget Monitoring and Evaluation Department of the NCS was set up to develop the implementation work plans that were consistent with national and ECOWAS regulations.  The CET was slated to be fully harmonized by 2020, but in practice some ECOWAS Member States have maintained deviations from the CET beyond the January 1, 2020, deadline.  The country has put in place a CET monitoring committee domiciled at the Ministry of Finance, consisting of several ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) related to the CET.  Nigeria applies five tariff bands under the CET:  zero duty on capital goods, machinery, and essential drugs not produced locally; 5 percent duty on imported raw materials; 10 percent duty on intermediate goods; 20 percent  duty on finished goods; and 35 percent duty on goods in certain sectors such as palm oil, meat products, dairy, and poultry that the Nigerian government seeks to protect.  The CET permits ECOWAS member governments to calculate import duties higher than the maximum allowed in the tariff bands (but not to exceed a total effective duty of 70 percent) for up to 3 percent of the 5,899 tariff lines included in the ECOWAS CET.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Nigeria has a complex, three-tiered legal system comprised of English common law, Islamic law, and Nigerian customary law.  Most business transactions are governed by common law modified by statutes to meet local demands and conditions.  The Supreme Court is the pinnacle of the judicial system and has original and appellate jurisdiction in specific constitutional, civil, and criminal matters as prescribed by Nigeria’s constitution.  The Federal High Court has jurisdiction over revenue matters, admiralty law, banking, foreign exchange, other currency and monetary or fiscal matters, and lawsuits to which the federal government or any of its agencies are party.  The Nigerian court system is slow and inefficient, lacks adequate court facilities and computerized document-processing systems, and poorly remunerates judges and other court officials, all of which encourages corruption and undermines enforcement.  Judges frequently fail to appear for trials and court officials lack proper equipment and training.

The constitution and law provide for an independent judiciary; however, the judicial branch remains susceptible to pressure from the executive and legislative branches.  Political leaders have influenced the judiciary, particularly at the state and local levels.

The World Bank’s publication, Doing Business 2020, ranked Nigeria 73 out of 190 on enforcement of contracts, a significant improvement from previous years.  The Doing Business report credited business reforms for improving contract enforcement by issuing new rules of civil procedure for small claims courts which limit adjournments to unforeseen and exceptional circumstances but noted that there can be variation in performance indicators between cities in Nigeria (as in other developing countries).  For example, resolving a commercial dispute takes 476 days in Kano but 376 days in Lagos.  In the case of Lagos, the 376 days includes 40 days for filing and service, 194 days for trial and judgment, and 142 days for enforcement of the judgment with total costs averaging 42 percent of the claim.  In Kano, however, filing and service only takes 21 days with enforcement of judgement only taking 90 days, but trial and judgment accounts for 365 days with total costs averaging lower at 28 percent of the claim.  In comparison, in OECD countries the corresponding figures are an average of 589.6 days and averaging 21.5 percent of the claim and in sub-Saharan countries an average of 654.9 days and averaging 41.6 percent of the claim.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The NIPC Act of 1995 allows 100 percent foreign ownership of firms, except in the oil and gas sector where investment remains limited to joint ventures or production-sharing agreements.  Laws restrict industries to domestic investors if they are considered crucial to national security, such as firearms, ammunition, and military and paramilitary apparel.  Foreign investors must register with the NIPC after incorporation under the Companies and Allied Matters Decree of 1990.  The NIPC Act prohibits the nationalization or expropriation of foreign enterprises except in case of national interest, but the Embassy is unaware of specific instances of such interference by the government.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

After years of debate, the Nigerian government enacted the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCPC) Act in February 2019.  The act repealed the Consumer Protection Act of 2004 and replaced the previous Consumer Protection Council with a Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission while also creating a Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal to handle issues and disputes arising from the operations of the Act.  Under the terms of the Act, businesses will be able to lodge anti-competitive practices complaints against other firms in the Tribunal.  The act prohibits agreements made to restrain competition, such as price fixing, price rigging, collusive tendering, etc. (with specific exemptions for collective bargaining agreements and employment, among other items).  The act empowers the President of Nigeria to regulate prices of certain goods and services on the recommendation of the Commission.

The law prescribes stringent fines for non-compliance.  The law mandates a fine of up to 10 percent of the company’s annual turnover in the preceding business year for offences.  The law harmonizes oversight for consumer protection, consolidating it under the FCCPC.

Expropriation and Compensation

The FGN has not expropriated or nationalized foreign assets since the late 1970s, and the NIPC Act of 1995 forbids nationalization of a business or assets unless the acquisition is in the national interest or for a public purpose.  In such cases, investors are entitled to fair compensation and legal redress.  A U.S.-owned waste management investment expropriated by Abia State in 2008 is the only known U.S. expropriation case in Nigeria.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Nigeria is a member of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the New York Convention of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (also called the “New York Convention”).  The Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1988 provides for a unified and straightforward legal framework for the fair and efficient settlement of commercial disputes by arbitration and conciliation.  The Act created internationally-competitive arbitration mechanisms, established proceeding schedules, provided for the application of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) arbitration rules or any other international arbitration rule acceptable to the parties, and made the New York Convention applicable to contract enforcement, based on reciprocity.  The Act allows parties to challenge arbitrators, provides that an arbitration tribunal shall ensure that the parties receive equal treatment, and ensures that each party has full opportunity to present its case.  Some U.S. firms have written provisions mandating International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration into their contracts with Nigerian partners.  Several other arbitration organizations also operate in Nigeria.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Nigeria’s civil courts have jurisdiction over disputes between foreign investors and the Nigerian government as well as between foreign investors and Nigerian businesses.  The courts occasionally rule against the government.  Nigerian law allows the enforcement of foreign judgments after proper hearings in Nigerian courts.  Plaintiffs receive monetary judgments in the currency specified in their claims.

Section 26 of the NIPC Act of 1995 provides for the resolution of investment disputes through arbitration as follows:

• Where a dispute arises between an investor and any Government of the Federation in respect of an enterprise, all efforts shall be made through mutual discussion to reach an amicable settlement.
• Any dispute between an investor and any Government of the Federation in respect of an enterprise to which this Act applies which is not amicably settled through mutual discussions, may be submitted at the option of the aggrieved party to arbitration as follows:
  1. in the case of a Nigerian investor, in accordance with the rules of procedure for arbitration as specified in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; or
  2. in the case of a foreign investor, within the framework of any bilateral or multilateral agreement on investment protection to which the Federal Government and the country of which the investor is a national are parties; or
  3. in accordance with any other national or international machinery for the settlement of investment disputes agreed on by the parties.
• Where in respect of any dispute, there is disagreement between the investor and the Federal Government as to the method of dispute settlement to be adopted, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute Rules shall apply.

Nigeria is a signatory to the 1958 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.  Nigerian Courts have generally recognized contractual provisions that call for international arbitration.  Nigeria does not have a Bilateral Investment Treaty or Free Trade Agreement with the United States.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Reflecting Nigeria’s business culture, entrepreneurs generally do not seek bankruptcy protection.  Claims often go unpaid, even in cases where creditors obtain judgments against defendants.  Under Nigerian law, the term bankruptcy generally refers to individuals whereas corporate bankruptcy is referred to as insolvency.  The former is regulated by the Bankruptcy Act of 1990, as amended by Bankruptcy Decree 109 of 1992.  The latter is regulated by Part XV of the Companies and Allied Matters Act Cap 59 1990 which replaced the Companies Act, 1968.  The Embassy is not aware of U.S. companies that have had to avail themselves of the insolvency provisions under Nigerian law.

Real Property

The Nigerian government recognizes secured interests in property, such as mortgages.  The recording of security instruments and their enforcement remain subject to the same inefficiencies as those in the judicial system.  In the World Bank Doing Business 2020 Report, Nigeria ranked 183 out of the 190 countries surveyed for registering property, a decline of one point over its 2019 ranking.  Property registration in Lagos required an average of 12 steps over 105 days at a cost of 11.1 percent of the property value while in Kano registering property averages 11 steps over 47 days at a cost of 11.8 percent of the property value.

Fee simple property rights remain rare.  Owners transfer most property through long-term leases, with certificates of occupancy acting as title deeds.  Property transfers are complex and must usually go through state governors’ offices, as state governments have jurisdiction over land ownership.  Authorities have often compelled owners to demolish buildings, including government buildings, commercial buildings, residences, and churches, even in the face of court injunctions.  Acquiring and maintaining rights to real property can be problematic.

Clarity of title and registration of land ownership remain significant challenges throughout rural Nigeria, where many smallholder farmers have only ancestral or traditional use claims to their land.  Nigeria’s land reforms have attempted to address this barrier to development but with limited success.

Intellectual Property Rights

Nigeria’s legal and institutional infrastructure for protecting intellectual property rights (IPR) remains in need of further development and more funding, even though there are laws on the books for enforcing most IPR. The areas in which the legislation is deficient include online piracy, geographical indications, and plant and animal breeders’ rights.  A bill to establish the industrial property commission to take over the functions of registration of trademarks, patents, designs, plant varieties, animal breeders and farmers’ rights, and supervise the new registries created under the industrial property act has been in the works since 2016.  No new IPR legislation has been enacted.

Copyright protection in Nigeria is governed by the Copyright Act of 1988, as amended in 1992 and 1999, which provides an adequate basis for enforcing copyright and combating piracy.  The Nigerian Copyright Commission, a division of the Ministry of Justice, administers the Act.  The International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition (IACC) has long noted that the Copyright Act should be amended to provide stiffer penalties for violators. Nigeria is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and in 2017 passed legislation to ratify two WIPO treaties that it signed in 1997:  the Copyright Treaty and the Performances and Phonograms Treaty.  These treaties address important digital communication and broadcast issues that have become increasingly relevant in the 18 years since Nigeria signed them.  The  Draft Copyright Bill in 2016 was revised to bring it into compliance with these two treaties and sent to the National Assembly in 2017, but it was never enacted.

In 2013, he Ministry of Communication Technology (MCT) issued local content guidelines (Guidelines for Nigerian Content Development in Information and Communications Technology) that  raised IPR concerns. Among other issues,  there is concern about the future ability of the Nigerian government to protect data and trade secrets because of the localization processes requiring the disclosure of source code and other sensitive design elements as a condition of doing business.  The ICT industry in Nigeria has pushed back strongly against several of the measures in those guidelines, which remain in effect but have not been fully enforced.  While the NITDA does not currently require in-country product manufacturing due to the difficult business environment in Nigeria, it has noted that it would continue to press for local ICT capacity building programs.

Violations of Nigerian IPR laws continue to be widespread largely due to a culture of inadequate enforcement.  That culture stems from several factors, including insufficient resources among enforcement agencies, lack of political will and focus on IPR, porous borders, entrenched trafficking systems that make enforcement difficult (and sometimes dangerous), and corruption.  The Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) has primary responsibility for copyright enforcement but is widely viewed as understaffed and underfunded relative to the magnitude of the IPR challenge in Nigeria.  Nevertheless, the NCC continues to carry out enforcement actions on a regular basis.  According to its report for 2018, the NCC conducted  five anti-piracy operations and seized 288 copyrighted works, including DVDs, books, MP3s, and software.  Anti-piracy operations in 2018 led to  seven arrests.

The NCS has general authority to seize and destroy contraband.  Under current law, copyrighted works require a notice issued by the rights owner to Customs to treat such works as infringing, but implementing procedures have not been developed and this procedure is handled on a case- by-case basis between the NCS and the NCC.  Once seizures are made, the NCS invites the NCC to inspect and subsequently take delivery of the consignment of fake goods for purposes of further investigation because the NCC has the statutory responsibility to investigate and prosecute copyright violations.  The NCC bears the costs of moving and storing infringing goods.   If, after investigations, any persons are identified with the infringing materials, a decision to prosecute may be made. Where no persons are identified or could be traced, the NCC may obtain an order of court to enable it to destroy such works.  The NCC works in cooperation with rights owners’ associations and stakeholders in the copyright industries on such matters.

Nigeria is not listed in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301Report or the Notorious Markets List. For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see the WIPO country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Toward Foreign Direct Investment

The Government of Senegal welcomes foreign investment. The investment code provides for equitable treatment of foreign and local firms. There is no restriction on ownership of businesses by foreign investors in most sectors. Foreign firms generally can invest in Senegal free from systematic discrimination in favor of local firms. Nevertheless, some U.S. and other foreign firms have noted that, in practice, Senegal’s investment environment favors incumbents and insiders – often other foreign firms – at the expense of new market entrants. Common complaints include excessive and inconsistently applied bureaucratic processes, nontransparent judicial processes, and an opaque decision-making process for public tenders and contracts. Financial and capital markets are open, attracting domestic, regional, and international capital.

The government conducts ongoing dialogue with the private sector through the Conseil Presidentiel de l’Investissement (Presidential Council on Investment, or “CPI”). Among other activities, the CPI sponsors an annual forum at which investors comment on the government’s policies and actions. Details are available at cpi-senegal.com. Another important venue for dialog is the annual Assises de l’Entreprises sponsored by the Conseil National du Patronat, the national employers’ association. More information can be found at www.cnp.sn. Senegal does not have a business ombudsman or other official charged with coordinating complaints about the business climate. In practice, investors must often engage directly at the minister level to resolve business climate concerns.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

There are no barriers to ownership of businesses by foreign investors in most sectors. There are some exceptions for strategic sectors such as water, electricity distribution, and port services where the government and state-owned companies maintain responsibility for most physical infrastructure but allow private companies to provide services. Senegal allows foreign investors equal access to ownership of property and does not impose any general limits on foreign control of investments. Senegal’s Investment Code includes guarantees for equal treatment of foreign investors including the right to acquire and dispose of property.

The Government of Senegal does some screening of proposed investments, primarily to verify compatibility with the country’s overall development goals and compliance with environmental regulations. The Ministry of Finance and Budget reviews project financing arrangements for projects implicating public funds to ensure compatibility with budget and debt policies. Senegal’s Investment Promotion Agency (APIX) can facilitate government review of investment proposals and the project approval process.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

On January 10, 2020, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved a new three-year Policy Coordination Instrument (PCI) for Senegal. For more information, see: https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2020/01/10/pr206-senegal-imf-executive-board-approves-three-year-policy-coordination-instrument 

Business Facilitation

The point of entry for business registration is Senegal’s Investment Promotion Agency (APIX), www.investinsenegal.com , which provides a range of administrative services to foreign investors. Since 2007, APIX has significantly reduced the average number of days it takes to start a business. While the government claims the average for starting a business is two days, the World Bank Doing Business 2020 estimates it takes six days to register a firm. In addition to other bureaucratic and documentary requirements, registering a business requires certification of certain documents by a public notary registered in Senegal. Senegalese law provides special preferences to facilitate investment and business operations by medium and small enterprises including reduced interest rates for Senegalese-owned companies. The government continues to expand its “single window” system offering one-stop government services for businesses, opening a new service centers in various locations and projecting to have at least one service center in each of the country’s 45 regional departments by 2021. Property owners can apply for construction permits online.  In 2019, the GOS made tax information and some payment options available online. With the support of UNCTAD and the government of Luxembourg, APIX recently launched an online portal, https://senegal.eregulations.org/ , containing extensive information regarding regulations applicable to businesses and investments in Senegal.

Despite these efforts, business climate challenges remain. Because the informal sector dominates Senegal’s economy, legitimate companies bear a relatively heavy tax burden.  Some U.S. companies complain about delays in the project development process due to excessive red tape and uncertainty over rules and processes.

Senegal’s Agency for the Development and Supervision of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (ADEPME) has launched initiatives to support small and medium-sized enterprises (defined in Senegal as companies with fewer than 50 employees and annual revenues of less than 5 billion CFA (about $9 million). These include tax incentives, grants for capacity building and for feasibility studies, and technical assistance to help firms operating in the informal sector formalize and register. ADEPME has also launched a program to certify the creditworthiness of SMEs, making them eligible for loans at preferential rates.

Outward Investment

The government neither promotes nor restricts outward investment.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Senegal has made some progress towards developing independent regulatory institutions, including regulators for the energy, telecommunications, and financial sectors. While Senegal lacks established procedures for a public comment process for proposed laws and regulations, the government frequently holds public hearings and workshops to discuss proposed initiatives. Proposed regulations are not always made available to the public in a timely way, however. Although Senegalese law requires proposed legislation to be published in advance in the government’s official gazette, the government does not consistently update the gazette’s website.

Authority to make rules and regulate rests with the relevant government ministry unless there is a separate regulatory authority for a particular industry. However, in some instances, a ministry or the president will exert authority over regulatory matters—e.g., determining electricity tariffs. Local government bodies do not have a decisive role in regulatory decisions.

The Commission de Regulation du Secteur de l’Electricite (CRSE) was established in 1998 to regulates the electricity sector and set electricity tariffs.  Although the CRSE is, by law, an independent agency, observers note that the government frequently exercises influence over its decisions. Under the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Compact focused on the power sector, the government has committed to reforms in the sector, including enacting a new electricity code and strengthening the CRSE’s capacity and independence. As part of these efforts, the MCC Compact, will fund technical assistance and capacity building for CRSE and other key stakeholders who govern the power sector.

The Autorite de Regulation des Telecommunications et des Postes is responsible for licensing and regulating telecommunications and postal services in Senegal. The Dakar-based regional Central Bank of West African States (known by its French acronym BCEAO) regulates the banking sector.

There is no legal requirement to conduct impact assessments of proposed regulations, and regulatory agencies rarely do so. There is no specialized government body tasked with reviewing and monitoring regulatory impacts. Legal, regulatory, and accounting systems closely follow French models. Financial statements must be prepared in accordance with the SYSCOA system, based on Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in France.

Senegal’s budget and information on debt obligations are widely and easily accessible to the public, including online.  The budget was substantially complete and considered generally reliable.  Senegal’s supreme audit institution reviewed the government’s accounts and has published its audit reports for Senegal’s budgets through 2017 online. Senegal is the first Francophone country in sub-Saharan Africa to submit to a fiscal transparency evaluation (FTE) by the IMF. In its January 30, 2019 FTE, the IMF rated Senegal “average” overall for countries of similar income and institutional capacity. Senegal was rated “advanced” or “good” on fiscal forecasting, budgeting, and fiscal reporting. It was rated “basic” on monitoring risks triggered by subnational governments. Senegal’s fiscal transparency would be improved by the supreme audit authority making its reports on the budget available in a timely manner.

The process for allocating licenses and contracts for natural resource extraction was outlined in law and appeared to be followed in practice.  In 2019, Senegal approved a new Petroleum Code, clarifying investment terms and local content requirements for foreign investment in the sector.  Senegal is currently offering new offshore exploration blocks through an open tender conducted in accordance with international standards. In February 2020, Senegal finalized a new Gas Code to govern development of a mid-stream gas distribution network that will be the subject of a competitive tender. Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was publicly available, and the government participated actively in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).

International Regulatory Considerations

As a member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Senegal generally adheres to regional requirements concerning the movement of people and goods. Similarly, fiscal policy directives of WAEMU are enforced in Senegal, as are regulations issued by the BCEAO. Senegal is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and generally notifies draft regulations to the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. However, since 2005 Senegal has banned imports of uncooked poultry and poultry products without notifying the WTO.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Senegal has well-developed commercial and investment laws. Although settlement of commercial disputes has historically been cumbersome and slow, in February 2018 Senegal launched a new commercial court system with jurisdiction over commercial matters and a mandate to resolve cases within three months.  The business community has welcomed the move, and in the past two years, the court has heard 11,054 cases involving disputes with a combined total value of nearly $500 million.  Companies may nevertheless encounter challenges in executing court decisions and enforcing their contractual rights.

While Senegal’s constitution mandates that the judiciary operate independently of the legislature and executive, the executive frequently exerts influence, particularly in high-profile criminal cases. This type of influence is rare in strictly commercial matters. Some foreign investors, however, report discriminatory treatment by local courts. Investors may consider including provisions for binding arbitration in their contracts to avoid prolonged and unpredictable entanglements in Senegalese courts.

Companies may seek judicial redress against regulatory decisions. Regulatory appeals are heard in administrative tribunals that specialize in adjudicating claims against the state.

Senegal is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization and the Bern Copyright Convention, and in June 2019 hosted a regional workshop on protecting intellectual property in the pharmaceutical and pesticide industries that gathered prosecutors, customs, and law enforcement officers. Nevertheless, the country has insufficient capacity to reliably protect intellectual property rights.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Senegal’s 2004 Investment Code provides basic guarantees for equal treatment of foreign investors and repatriation of profit and capital. It also specifies tax and customs exemptions according to the investment volume, company size and location, with investments outside of Dakar eligible for longer tax exemptions. A law to enhance transparency in public procurement and public tenders entered into force in 2008, establishing a public procurement regulatory body, the Autorité de Régulation des Marchés Publics (ARMP), which publishes annual reviews of public procurement. Procedures for challenging tender awards are available. The government enacted a law on public-private partnerships in 2014 to facilitate expedited approval of projects that include a minimum share of domestic investment. As of July 2020, the GOS was in the process of revising the public-private partnership law.

Regulations of the Central Bank of West African States (known by its French acronym BCEAO) proscribe the use of offshore accounts in project finance transactions within the WAEMU except where approved by the Ministry of Finance and Budget, with the express consent (“avis conforme”) of the BCEAO. According to the BCEAO, these restrictions allow visibility over international transactions, deter money laundering, and help the BCEAO maintain adequate foreign currency reserves. The BCEAO emphasizes the importance of these rules in enabling it to fulfill its mandate of maintaining the stability of the franc CFA’s peg to the euro.

Since 2018, the BCEAO and Senegalese Ministry of Finance Budget have tightened their approach to the approvals of offshore accounts. Although there is no strict “maximum” number of accounts that will be permitted, informal guidelines suggest that transactions using one to three such accounts have the greatest chance of being approved. According the BCEAO, the intent is to encourage the minimum number of such accounts necessary to legitimately conduct the transaction. Project managers and lenders should raise the subject of offshore accounts with the Ministry of Finance as early in the process as possible and should be prepared to submit a functional justification for each requested account. All offshore accounts must be “reauthorized” on an annual basis.

More information on Senegal’s legal and regulatory environment, including texts of the Investment Code, the Mining Code, a new Petroleum Code finalized in February 2019, can be found at the following:

• Investment Code:
• Mining Code:
• Petroleum Code:

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Senegal’s national competition commission, the Commission Nationale de la Concurrence, is responsible for reviewing transactions for competition-related concerns.

Expropriation and Compensation

Senegal’s Investment Code includes protection against expropriation or nationalization of private property with exceptions for “reasons of public utility” that would involve “just compensation” in advance. In general, Senegal has no history of expropriation or creeping expropriation against private companies. The government may sometimes use eminent domain justifications to procure land for public infrastructure projects with compensation provided to landowners. Senegal’s Bilateral Investment Treaty with the U.S. also specifies that international legal standards are applicable to any cases of expropriation of investment and the payment of compensation.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Senegal is a member of the International Convention for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and a signatory of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention). Senegalese law recognizes the Cour d’Appel (Appeals Court) as the competent authority for the recognition and enforcement of awards rendered pursuant to ICSID. Senegal is also a signatory to the Organization for the Harmonization of Corporate Law in Africa Treaty (OHADA). This agreement supports enforcement of awards under the New York Convention. The Autorité de Régulation des Marchés Publics (ARMP) manages a dispute resolution mechanism for public tenders.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Senegal has growing experience in using international arbitration for resolution of investment disputes with foreign companies, including some cases involving tax disputes with U.S. firms. The government has also prevailed in some arbitration cases, including a 2013 arbitration decision in a high-profile case with a multinational company over an integrated mining/railway/port project, fostering greater confidence within the government to the arbitration process. Senegal’s bilateral investment treaty with the United States includes provisions to facilitate the referral of investment disputes to binding arbitration.

International firms have pursued a variety of investment disputes during the last decade, including at least two U.S. firms involved in tax and customs disputes. Other foreign companies in the mining and telecommunications sectors have pursued commercial disputes over licensing. These disputes have often been resolved through arbitration or an amicable settlement.

Senegal has no history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The government has initiated several programs to establish commercial courts and use alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce the time required for resolving business disputes. Under the OHADA treaty, Senegal recognizes the corporate law and arbitration procedures common to the 16 member states in western and central Africa. Senegalese courts routinely recognize arbitration clauses in contracts and agreements. It is not unusual for courts to rule against state-owned enterprises in disputes involving private enterprises.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Senegal has commercial and bankruptcy laws that address liquidation of business liabilities. Foreign creditors receive equal treatment under Senegalese bankruptcy law in making claims against liquidated assets. Monetary judgments are normally in local currency. As a member of OHADA, Senegal permits three different types of bankruptcy liquidation through a negotiated settlement, company restructuring, or complete liquidation of assets. Senegal ranked 96th out of 190 countries on the “Resolving Insolvency” indicator in the 2020 World Bank Doing Business Index. According to the index, it takes an average of 36 months to complete liquidation proceedings in Senegal. Secured creditors recover an average of 30 cents per every dollar owed in such proceedings, compared to an average of 20.5 for sub-Saharan Africa and 70.2 for OECD high income countries.

Real Property

The Senegalese Civil Code provides a framework, based on French law, for enforcing private property rights. The code provides for equality of treatment and non-discrimination against foreign-owned businesses. Senegal maintains a property title and a land registration system, but application is uneven outside of urban areas. Establishing ownership rights to real estate can be difficult. Once established, however, ownership is protected by law.

The government has undertaken several reforms to make it easier for investors to acquire and register property. It has streamlined procedures and reduced associated costs for property registration. The government has developed new land tenure models intended to facilitate land acquisition by resolving conflicts between traditional and government land ownership. If the new models are widely adopted, the government and donors expect they will facilitate land acquisition and investment in the agricultural sector while providing benefits to traditional landowners in local communities.

The government generally pays compensation when it takes private property through eminent domain actions. Senegal’s housing finance market is under-developed and few long-term mortgage-financing vehicles exist. There is no secondary market for mortgages or other bundled revenue streams. The judiciary is inconsistent when adjudicating property disputes. Senegal ranked 116 out of 190 countries in the 2020 Doing Business Index for Registering Property. According to the World Bank methodology, it requires an average of 41 days to register property against an average of 51.6 days in sub-Saharan Africa and 23.6 days in OECD high-income countries. Five separate procedures are required for property registration.

Intellectual Property Rights

Senegal maintains an adequate legal framework for protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), but the country has limited institutional capacity to implement this framework and enforce IPR protections. Senegal has been a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) since its inception. Senegal is also a member of the African Organization of Intellectual Property (OAPI), a grouping of 15 francophone African countries with a common system for obtaining and maintaining protection for patents, trademarks, and industrial designs. Local statutes recognize reciprocal protection for authors or artists who are nationals of countries adhering to the 1991 Paris Convention on Intellectual Property Rights. Patents may be registered with the Agence sénégalaise pour la Propriété industrielle et l’Innovation technologique (ASPIT) and are protected for 20 years. An annual charge is levied during this period. Registered trademarks are protected for a period of 20 years. Trademarks may be renewed indefinitely by subsequent registrations. Senegal is a signatory to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. The Senegalese Copyright Office, part of the Ministry of Culture, protects copyrights. Bootlegging of music CDs is common and concerns the local music industry. The Copyright Office has taken actions to combat media piracy, including seizure of counterfeit cassettes and CD/DVDs. In 2008, the government established a special police unit to better enforce the country’s anti-piracy and counterfeit laws. In general, however, the government has limited capacity to combat IPR violations or to seize counterfeit goods. Customs screening for counterfeit goods production is weak, and confiscated goods occasionally re-appear in the market. Nevertheless, the government has made efforts to raise awareness of the impact of counterfeit products on the Senegalese marketplace, especially regarding pharmaceuticals, and officers have participated in trainings offered by manufacturers to identify counterfeit products.

Senegal is not included in the United States Trade Representative(USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

The government of South Africa is generally open to foreign investment as a means to drive economic growth, improve international competitiveness, and access foreign markets. Merger and acquisition activity is more sensitive and requires advance work to answer potential stakeholder concerns. The 2018 Competition Amendment Bill, which was signed into law in February, 2019, introduced a mechanism for South Africa to review foreign direct investments and mergers and acquisitions by a foreign acquiring firm on the basis of protecting national security interests (see section on Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment below). Virtually all business sectors are open to foreign investment. Certain sectors require government approval for foreign participation, including energy, mining, banking, insurance, and defense.

The Department of Trade and Industry and Competition’s (the DTIC) Trade and Investment South Africa (TISA) division provides assistance to foreign investors. TISA has opened provincial One-Stop Shops that provide investment support for foreign direct investment (FDI), with offices in Johannesburg, Cape Town, and Durban, and a national One Stop Shop located on the DTIC campus in Pretoria and online at http://www.investsa.gov.za/one-stop-shop/ . An additional one-stop shop has opened at Dube Trade Port, which is a special economic zone aerotropolis linked to the King Shaka International Airport in Durban.

The DTIC actively courts manufacturing enterprises in sectors that its research indicates South Africa has a comparative advantage. It also favors manufacturing that it hopes will be labor intensive and where suppliers can be developed from local industries. The DTIC has traditionally focused on manufacturing industries over services industries, despite a strong service-oriented economy in South Africa. TISA offers information on sectors and industries, consultation on the regulatory environment, facilitation for investment missions, links to joint venture partners, information on incentive packages, assistance with work permits, and logistical support for relocation. The DTIC publishes the “Investor’s Handbook” on its website: www.thedtic.gov.za 

While the government of South Africa supports investment in principle and takes active steps to attract FDI, investors and market analysts are concerned that its commitment to assist foreign investors is insufficient in practice. Several investors reported trouble accessing senior decision makers. South Africa scrutinizes merger- and acquisition-related foreign direct investment for its impact on jobs, local industry, and retaining South African ownership of key sectors. Private sector representatives and other interested parties were concerned about the politicization of South Africa’s posture towards this type of investment. Despite South Africa’s general openness to investment, actions by some South African Government ministries, populist statements by some politicians, and rhetoric in certain political circles show a lack of appreciation for the importance of FDI to South Africa’s growth and prosperity and a lack of concern about the negative impact domestic policies may have on the investment climate. Ministries often do not consult adequately with stakeholders before implementing laws and regulations or fail to incorporate stakeholder concerns if consultations occur. On the positive side, the President, assisted by his appointment of four investment envoys in 2018, and a few business-oriented reformists in his cabinet, are working to restore a positive investment climate and appear to be making progress as they engage in senior level overseas roadshows to attract investment. Nevertheless, the government has not yet implemented any real economic reforms to address the structural deficiencies hindering South Africa’s economic growth.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Currently there is no limitation on foreign private ownership. South Africa’s transformation efforts – the re-integration of historically disadvantaged South Africans into the economy – has led to policies that could disadvantage foreign and some locally owned companies. The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act of 2013 (B-BBEE), and associated codes of good practice, requires levels of company ownership and participation by Black South Africans to get bidding preferences on government tenders and contracts. The DTIC created an alternative equity equivalence (EE) program for multinational or foreign owned companies to allow them to score on the ownership requirements under the law, but many view the terms as onerous and restrictive. Currently eight multinationals, most in the technology sector, participate in this program.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

The last Trade Policy Review carried out by the World Trade Organization for the Southern African Customs Union, in which South Africa is a member, was in 2015. Neither the OECD nor the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has conducted investment policy reviews for South Africa.

Business Facilitation

According to the World Bank’s Doing Business report, South Africa’s rank in ease of doing business in 2020 was 84 of 190, down from 82 in 2019. It ranks 139th for starting a business, 5 points lower than in 2019. In South Africa, it takes an average of forty days to complete the process. South Africa ranks 145 of 190 countries on trading across borders.

The DTIC has a national InvestSA One Stop Shop (OSS) to simplify administrative procedures and guidelines for foreign companies wishing to invest in South Africa. The DTIC, in conjunction with provincial governments, opened physical OSS locations in Cape Town, Durban, and Johannesburg. These physical locations bring together key government entities dealing with issues including policy and regulation, permits and licensing, infrastructure, finance, and incentives, with a view to reducing lengthy bureaucratic procedures, reducing bottlenecks, and providing post-investment services. Some users of the OSS complain that not all of the inter-governmental offices are staffed, so finding a representative for certain transactions has proven difficult. The virtual OSS web site is: http://www.investsa.gov.za/one-stop-shop/ .

The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC), a body of the DTIC, is responsible for business registrations and publishes a step-by-step process for registering a company. This process can be done on its website (http://www.cipc.co.za/index.php/register-your-business/companies/ ), through a self-service terminal, or through a collaborating private bank. New business registrants also need to register through the South African Revenue Service (SARS) to get an income tax reference number for turnover tax (small companies), corporate tax, employer contributions for PAYE (income tax), and skills development levy (applicable to most companies). The smallest informal companies may not be required to register with CIPC, but must register with the tax authorities. Companies also need to register with the Department of Labour (DoL) – www.labour.gov.za  – to contribute to the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) and a compensation fund for occupational injuries. The DoL registration takes the longest (up to 30 days), but can be done concurrently with other registrations.

Outward Investment

South Africa does not incentivize outward investments. South Africa’s stock foreign direct investments in the United States in 2018 totaled USD 3.9 billion (latest figures available), a 5.6 percent decrease from 2017. The largest outward direct investment of a South African company is a gas liquefaction plant in the State of Louisiana by Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) and NASDAQ dual-listed petrochemical company SASOL. There are some restrictions on outward investment, such as a R1 billion (USD 83 million) limit per year on outward flows per company. Larger investments must be approved by the South African Reserve Bank and at least 10 percent of the foreign target entities voting rights must be obtained through the investment. https://www.resbank.co.za/RegulationAndSupervision/FinancialSurveillanceAndExchangeControl/FAQs/Pages/Corporates.aspx 

Transparency of the Regulatory System

South African laws and regulations are generally published in draft form for stakeholders to comment, and legal, regulatory, and accounting systems are generally transparent and consistent with international norms.

The DTIC is responsible for business-related regulations. It develops and reviews regulatory systems in the areas of competition, standards, consumer protection, company and intellectual property registration and protections, as well as other subjects in the public interest. It also oversees the work of national and provincial regulatory agencies mandated to assist the DTIC in creating and managing competitive and socially responsible business and consumer regulations. The DTIC publishes a list of Bills and Acts that govern its work at: http://www.thedtic.gov.za/legislation/legislation-and-business-regulation/?hilite=%27IDZ%27 

The 2015 Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Act authorized the creation of the South African Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA), meant in part to address the backlog of more than 7000 drugs waiting for approval to be used in South Africa. Established in 2018, and unlike its predecessor, the Medicines Control Council (MCC), SAHPRA is a stand-alone public entity governed by a board that is appointed by and accountable to the South African Ministry of Health. SAHPRA is responsible for the monitoring, evaluation, regulation, investigation, inspection, registration, and control of medicines, scheduled substances, clinical trials and medical devices, in vitro diagnostic devices (IVDs), complementary medicines, and blood and blood-based products. SAHPRA intends to do this through 207 full-time in-house technical evaluators, though this structure has not been fully staffed. Unlike with the MCC, SAHPRA’s funding is provided by the retention of registration fees. Despite its launch in 2018, the full staffing and implementation of SAPHRA is anticipated to take up to five years, and clearing the backlog of drug registration dossiers will also take significant time.

South Africa’s Consumer Protection Act (2008) went into effect in 2011. The legislation reinforces various consumer rights, including right of product choice, right to fair contract terms, and right of product quality. Impact of the legislation varies by industry, and businesses have adjusted their operations accordingly. A brochure summarizing the Consumer Protection Act can be found at: http://www.thedtic.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/CP_Brochure.pdf . Similarly, the National Credit Act of 2005 aims to promote a fair and non-discriminatory marketplace for access to consumer credit and for that purpose to provide the general regulation of consumer credit and improves standards of consumer information. A brochure summarizing the National Credit Act can be found at: http://www.thedtic.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/NCA_Brochure.pdf 

International Regulatory Considerations

South Africa is a member of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), the oldest existing customs union in the world. SACU functions mainly on the basis of the 2002 SACU Agreement which aims to: (a) facilitate the cross-border trade in goods among SACU members; (b) create effective, transparent and democratic institutions; (c) promote fair competition in the common customs area; (d) increase investment opportunities in the common customs area; (e) enhance the economic development, diversification, industrialization and competitiveness of member States; (f) promote the integration of its members into the global economy through enhanced trade and investment; (g) facilitate the equitable sharing of revenue arising from customs and duties levied by members; and (h) facilitate the development of common policies and strategies.

The 2002 SACU Agreement requires member States to develop common policies and strategies with respect to industrial development; cooperate in the development of agricultural policies; cooperate in the enforcement of competition laws and regulations; develop policies and instruments to address unfair trade practices between members; and calls for harmonization of product standards and technical regulations. SACU continues to work on developing these common policies.

In general, South Africa models its standards according to European standards or UK standards where those differ.

South Africa is a member of the WTO and attempts to notify all draft technical regulations to the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), though often after the regulations have been implemented.

In November 2017, South Africa ratified the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement. According to the government, it has implemented over 90 percent of the commitments as of May 2020. The outstanding measures were notified under Category B, to be implemented by the indicative date of 2022 without capacity building support and include Article 3 and Article 10 commitments on Advance Rulings and Single Window.

The South African Government is not party to the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPO).

Legal System and Judicial Independence

South Africa has a mixed legal system composed of civil law inherited from the Dutch, common law inherited from the British, and African customary law, of which there are many variations. As a general rule, South Africa follows English law in criminal and civil procedure, company law, constitutional law, and the law of evidence, but follows Roman-Dutch common law in contract law, law of delict (torts), law of persons, and family law. South African company law regulates corporations, including external companies, non-profit, and for-profit companies (including state-owned enterprises). Funded by the national Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, South Africa has district and magistrates courts across 350 districts and high courts for each of the provinces (except Limpopo and Mpumalanga, which are heard in Gauteng). Often described as “the court of last resort,” the Supreme Court of Appeals hears appeals, and its jurisprudence may only be overruled by the apex court, the Constitutional Court. Moreover, South Africa has multiple specialized courts, including the Competition Appeal Court, Electoral Court, Land Claims Court, the Labour and Labour Appeal Courts, and Tax Courts to handle disputes between taxpayers and the South African Revenue Service. These courts exist parallel to the court hierarchy, and their decisions are subject to the same process of appeal and review as the normal courts. Analysts routinely praise the competence and reliability of judicial processes, and the courts’ independence has been repeatedly proven with high-profile rulings against controversial legislation, as well as against former presidents and corrupt individuals in the executive and legislative branches.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The February 2019 ratification of the Competition Amendment Bill introduced, among other revisions, section 18A that mandates the President create a committee – comprised of 28 Ministers and officials chosen by the President – to evaluate and intervene in a merger or acquisition by a foreign acquiring firm on the basis of protecting national security interests. The new section states that the President must identify and publish in the Gazette – the South African equivalent of the U.S. Federal Register – a list of national security interests including the markets, industries, goods or services, sectors or regions in which a merger involving a foreign acquiring firm must be notified to the South African government. It also suggests the President consider a merger’s impact on the economic and social stability of South Africa. As of May, 2020, the president has not established the committee, nor has he published the list of national security interests.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The Competition Commission is empowered to investigate, control and evaluate restrictive business practices, abuse of dominant positions, and mergers in order to achieve equity and efficiency. Their public website is www.compcom.co.za 

The Competition Tribunal has jurisdiction throughout South Africa and adjudicates competition matters in accordance with the Competition Act. While the Commission is the investigation and enforcement agency, the Tribunal is the adjudicative body, very much like a court.

In addition to the points made in the previous section, the amendments, presented by the Ministry for Economic Development that revise the Competition Act of 1998 and entered effect in February 2019 extend the mandate of the competition authorities and the executive to tackle high levels of economic concentration, address the limited transformation in the economy, and curb the abuse of market power by dominant firms. The changes introduced through the Competition Amendment Act are meant to curb anti-competitive practices and break down monopolies that hinder “transformation” – the increased participation of black and HDSA in the South African economy. The amendments aim to deter the abuse of market dominance by large firms that use practices such as margin squeeze, exclusionary practices, price discrimination, and predatory pricing. By increasing the penalties for these prohibited business practices – for repeat offences the penalties could amount to between 10 percent to 25 percent of a firm’s annual turnover – and allowing the parent or holding company to be held liable for the actions of its subsidiaries that contravene competition law, the Competition Commission hopes to break down these anticompetitive practices and open up new opportunities for SMEs.

Expropriation and Compensation

Racially discriminatory property laws and land allocations during the colonial and apartheid periods resulted in highly distorted patterns of land ownership and property distribution in South Africa. Given the slow and mixed success of land reform to date, the National Assembly (Parliament) passed a motion in February 2018 to investigate a proposal to amend the constitution (specifically Section 25, the “property clause”) to allow for land expropriation without compensation (EWC). The constitutional Bill of Rights, where Section 25 resides, has never been amended. Some politicians, think-tanks, and academics argue that Section 25, as written, allows for EWC in certain cases, while others insist that in order to implement EWC more broadly, amending the constitution is required. Academics foresee a few test cases for EWC over the next year, primarily targeted at abandoned buildings in urban areas, informal settlements in peri-urban areas, and involving labor tenants in rural areas.

Parliament tasked an ad hoc Constitutional Review Committee – made up of parliamentarians from various political parties – to report back on whether to amend the constitution to allow EWC, and if so, how it should be done. In December 2018, the National Assembly adopted the committee’s report recommending a constitutional amendment. Following elections in May 2019 the new Parliament created an ad hoc Committee to Initiate and Introduce Legislation to Amend Section 25 of the Constitution. That committee drafted proposed constitutional amendment language that would explicitly allow for EWC and is currently holding public workshops and accepting public comments on the draft language. Parliament had tasked the committee with finalizing the draft language for submission to Parliament by the end of May 2020. That deadline will likely be extended due to restrictions on Parliament’s legislative abilities under the current national declaration of a state of disaster respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. South African law requires that Parliament engage in a rigorous public participation process. Parliament must publish a proposed bill to amend the Constitution in the Government Gazette at least 30 days prior to its introduction to allow for public comment. Any change to the constitution would need a two-thirds parliamentary majority (267 votes) to pass, as well as the support of six out of the nine provinces in the National Council of Provinces. Currently, no single political party has such a majority.

In addition to an amendment to Section 25 of the Constitution, Parliament must also pass an Expropriation Bill to set forth the legal procedures of how the expropriation process will occur. A draft Expropriation Bill was published in December 2018 for public comment but has not yet been submitted to Parliament.

In September 2018, President Ramaphosa appointed an advisory panel on land reform, which supports the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Land Reform chaired by Deputy President David Mabuza. Comprised of ten members from academia, social entrepreneurship, and activist organizations, the panel published its Report on Land Reform and Agriculture in May 2019 and submitted it to the National Assembly Committee on Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development in March 2020. The 144-page report was a comprehensive overview of all aspects of land reform in rural and urban areas, including land tenure, agriculture, access to land, infrastructure development, and the failure of the government’s current land reform policies. The panel made recommendations, many focused on improving current programs and making them more efficient. The panel recognized expropriation without compensation (EWC) as one tool of land reform but saw its usefulness in only limited circumstances and reinforced the need to protect the rights of landowners.

Existing expropriation law, including The Expropriation Act of 1975 (Act) and the Expropriation Act Amendment of 1992, entitles the government to expropriate private property for reasons of public necessity or utility. The decision is an administrative one. Compensation should be the fair market value of the property as agreed between the buyer and seller, or determined by the court, as per Section 25 of the Constitution. In several restitution cases in which the government initiated proceedings to expropriate white-owned farms after courts ruled the land had been seized from blacks during apartheid, the owners rejected the court-approved purchase prices. In most of these cases, the government and owners reached agreement on compensation prior to any final expropriation actions. The government has twice exercised its expropriation power, taking possession of farms in Northern Cape and Limpopo provinces in 2007 after negotiations with owners collapsed. The government paid the owners the fair market value for the land in both cases. A new draft expropriation law, intended to replace the Expropriation Act of 1975, was passed and is awaiting Presidential signature. Some analysts have raised concerns about aspects of the new legislation, including new clauses that would allow the government to expropriate property without first obtaining a court order.

In 2018, the government operationalized the 2014 Property Valuation Act that creates the office of Valuer-General charged with the valuation of property that has been identified for land reform or acquisition or disposal by a department. Among other things, the Act gives the government the option to expropriate property based on a formulation in the Constitution termed “just and equitable compensation.” This considers the market value of the property and applies discounts based on the current use of the property, the history of the acquisition, and the extent of direct state investment and subsidy in the acquisition and capital improvements to the property. Critics fear that this could lead to the government expropriating property at a price lower than fair market value. The Act also allows the government to expropriate property under a broad range of policy goals, including economic transformation and correcting historical grievances.

The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 (MPRDA), enacted in 2004, gave the state ownership of all of South Africa’s mineral and petroleum resources.  It replaced private ownership with a system of licenses controlled by the government of South Africa, and issued by the Department of Mineral Resources.  Under the MPRDA, investors who held pre-existing rights were granted the opportunity to apply for licenses, provided they met the licensing criteria, including the achievement of certain B-BBEE objectives.  Amendments to the MPRDA passed by Parliament in 2014, but were not signed by the President.  In August 2018, the Minister for the Department of Mineral Resources, Gwede Mantashe, called for the recall of the amendments so that oil and gas could be separated out into a new bill.  The Minister also announced the B-BBEE provisions in the new Mining Charter would not apply during exploration, but would start once commodities were found and mining commenced. On November 28, 2019, the newly merged Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) published draft regulations to the MPRDA, giving a 30-day window for providing public comments. On December 24, 2019, the DMRE published the Draft Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Bill for public comment, with a February 20, 2020 deadline for the submission of public comments. Oil and gas exploration and production is currently regulated under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (MPRDA), but the new Bill will repeal and replace the relevant sections pertaining to upstream petroleum activities in the MPRDA.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

South Africa is a member of the New York Convention of 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration awards as implemented through the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Act, No. 40 of 1977 . South Africa is not a member of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, nor a member of the World Bank’s International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The 2015 Promotion of Investment Act removes the option for investor state dispute settlement through international courts typically afforded through bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Instead, investors disputing an action taken by the South African government must request the Department of Trade and Industry to facilitate the resolution by appointing a mediator. A foreign investor may also approach any competent court, independent tribunal, or statutory body within South Africa for the resolution of the dispute.

Dispute resolution can be a time-intensive process in South Africa. If the matter is urgent, and the presiding judge agrees, an interim decision can be taken within days while the appeal process can take months or years. If the matter is a dispute of law and is not urgent, it may proceed by application or motion to be solved within months. Where there is a dispute of fact, the matter is referred to trial, which can take several years. The Alternative Dispute Resolution involves negotiation, mediation or arbitration, and may resolve the matter within a couple of months.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Arbitration in South Africa follows the Arbitration Act of 1965, which does not distinguish between domestic and international arbitration and is not based on UNCITRAL model law. South African courts retain discretion to hear a dispute over a contract entered into under U.S. law and under U.S. jurisdiction; however, the South African court will interpret the contract with the law of the country or jurisdiction provided for in the contract.

South Africa recognizes the International Chamber of Commerce, which supervises the resolution of transnational commercial disputes. South Africa applies its commercial and bankruptcy laws with consistency and has an independent, objective court system for enforcing property and contractual rights.

Alternative Dispute Resolution is increasingly popular in South Africa for many reasons, including the confidentiality which can be imposed on the evidence, case documents, and the judgment. South Africa’s new Companies Act also provides a mechanism for Alternative Dispute Resolution.

Bankruptcy Regulations

South Africa has a strong bankruptcy law, which grants many rights to debtors, including rejection of overly burdensome contracts, avoiding preferential transactions, and the ability to obtain credit during insolvency proceedings. South Africa ranks 68 out of 190 countries for resolving insolvency according to the 2020 World Bank Doing Business report, a drop in its ranking from its 2018 rank of 55 and 2019 rank of 65.

Real Property

The South African legal system protects and facilitates the acquisition and disposition of all property rights (e.g., land, buildings, and mortgages). Deeds must be registered at the Deeds Office. Banks usually register mortgages as security when providing finance for the purchase of property.

Foreigners may purchase and own immovable property in South Africa without any restrictions, as foreigners are generally subject to the same laws as South African nationals. Foreign companies and trusts are also permitted to own property in South Africa, provided that they are registered in South Africa as an external company.

South Africa ranks 108 of 190 countries in registering property according to the 2020 World Bank Doing Business report.

Intellectual Property Rights

South Africa has a strong legal structure and enforcement of intellectual property rights through civil and criminal procedures.  Criminal procedures are generally lengthy, so the customary route is through civil enforcement.  There are concerns about counterfeit consumer goods, illegal commercial photocopying, and software piracy.

Owners of patents and trademarks may license them locally, but when a patent license entails the payment of royalties to a non-resident licensor, the DTIC must approve the royalty agreement. Patents are granted for twenty years – usually with no option to renew. Trademarks are valid for an initial period of ten years, renewable for ten-year periods. The holder of a patent or trademark must pay an annual fee to preserve ownership rights. All agreements relating to payment for the right to use know-how, patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other similar property are subject to approval by exchange control authorities in the SARB. A royalty of up to four percent is the standard approval for consumer goods, and up to six percent for intermediate and finished capital goods.

Literary, musical, and artistic works, as well as cinematographic films and sound recordings are eligible for copyright under the Copyright Act of 1978. New designs may be registered under the Designs Act of 1967, which grants copyrights for five years. The Counterfeit Goods Act of 1997 provides additional protection to owners of trademarks, copyrights, and certain marks under the Merchandise Marks Act of 1941. The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act of 1997 amended the Merchandise Marks Act of 1941, the Performers’ Protection Act of 1967, the Patents Act of 1978, the Copyright Act of 1978, the Trademarks Act of 1993, and the Designs Act of 1993 to bring South African intellectual property legislation fully into line with the WTO’s Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS). Further Amendments to the Patents Act of 1978 also brought South Africa into line with TRIPS, to which South Africa became a party in 1999, and implemented the Patent Cooperation Treaty. The private sector and law enforcement cooperate extensively to stop the flow of counterfeit goods into the marketplace, and the private sector believes that South Africa is making significant progress in this regard. Statistics on seizures are not available.

In an effort to modernize outdated copyright law to incorporate “digital age” advances, the DTIC introduced the latest draft of the Copyright Amendment Bill in May 2017. The South African Parliament and the National Council of Provinces approved the Copyright Amendment Bill in March 2019 and sent the bill to the president for signature. Among the issues of concern to some private sector stakeholders is the introduction of the U.S. model of “fair use” for copyright exemptions without prescribing industry-specific circumstances where fair use will apply, creating uncertainty about copyrights enforcement. Other concerns that stakeholders have include a clause which allows the Minister of Trade Industry and Competition to set royalty rates for visual artistic works and impose compulsory contractual terms. The bill also limits the assignment of copyright to 25 years before it reverts back to the author. In June 2020, the president sent the bill back to the Parliament noting concerns regarding the constitutionality of the bill as well as its compliance with international treaties.

The Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill seeks to address issues relating to the payment of royalties to performers; safeguarding the rights of contracting parties; and promotes performers’ moral and economic rights for performances in fixations (recordings). Similar to the Copyright Amendment Bill, this bill gives the Minister of Trade and Industry authority to determine equitable remuneration for a performer and copyright owner for the direct or indirect use of a work. It also suggests that any agreement between the copyright owner and performer will only last for a period of 25 years and does not determine what happens after 25 years. The bill also does not stipulate how it will address works with multiple performers, particularly how to resolve potential problems of hold-outs when contracts are renegotiated that could hinder the further exploitation of a work. In June 2020, the president sent the bill back to the Parliament.

The DTIC released the final Intellectual Property Policy of the Republic of South Africa Phase 1 in June, 2018, that informs the government’s approach to intellectual property and existing laws. Phase I focuses on the health space, particularly pharmaceuticals. The South African Government, led by the DTIC, held multiple rounds of public consultations since its introduction and the 2016 release of the IP Consultative Framework.

Among other things, the IP policy framework calls for South Africa to carry out substantive search and examination (SSE) on patent applications and to introduce a pre- and post-grant opposition system. The DTIC repeatedly stressed its goal of creating the domestic capacity to understand and review patents, without having to rely on other countries’ examinations. U.S. companies working in South Africa have been generally supportive of the government’s goal; they are concerned, however, that the relatively low number of examiners currently on staff (20) to handle the proposed SSE process and the introduction of a pre-grant opposition system in South Africa could lead to significant delays of products to market. The South African Government is working with international partners (including USPTO and the European Union) to provide accelerated training of their patent reviewers while also recruiting new staff.

The new IP policy framework also raises concerns around the threat of separate patentability criteria for medicines and a more liberalized compulsory licensing regime. Stakeholders are calling for more concrete assurances that the use of compulsory licensing provisions will be as a last resort and applied in a manner consistent with WTO rules. Industry sources report they are not aware of a single case of South Africa issuing a compulsory license.

South Africa is currently in the process of implementing the Madrid Protocol. CIPC has completed drafting legislative amendments after consultations with stakeholders and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on the implementation process in South Africa. WIPO has conducted a number of missions to South Africa on this matter, the latest of which was in February 2018. South Africa has also engaged with national IP offices with similar trade mark legislation, such as New Zealand.

For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

In general, Zambian law does not restrict foreign investors in any sector of the economy, although there are a few regulations and practices limiting foreign control laid out below. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) continues to play an increasing role in Zambia’s economy, contributing to increased capital inflows and overall investment. The Zambia Development Agency (ZDA), which is responsible for promoting trade and investment and coordinating the private sector-led economic development strategy, is the agency charged with attracting more FDI to Zambia.

Zambia has undertaken institutional reforms aimed at improving its attractiveness to investors; these reforms include the Private Sector Development Reform Program (PSDRP), which addresses issues related to cost of doing business through legislation and institutional reforms, and the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), which addresses some issues relating to transparency and good governance. However, frequent government policy changes create uncertainty for foreign investors. Recent examples include: a planned, rapid transition from a value-added tax regime to a sales tax that was planned to take effect in July 2019 but was scrapped in September 2019 after multiple last minute delays; taxes and royalty increases in the mining sector that took effect in January 2019 and marked the tenth significant change to mining taxes and regulations in 16 years; a labor law update that significantly increased costs of formal businesses without sufficient public consultation, and constant and unpredictable limits on various crop exports.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

The ZDA does not discriminate against foreign investors, and all sectors are open to both local and foreign investors. Foreign and domestic private entities have a right to establish and own business enterprises and engage in all forms of remunerative activities, and no business ventures are reserved solely for the government. Although private entities may freely establish and dispose of interests in business enterprises, investment board approval is required to transfer an investment license for a given enterprise to a new owner.

Currently, all land in Zambia is considered state land and ownership is vested in the president. Land titles held by foreigners are for renewable 99-year leases; ownership is not conferred. According to the government, the current land administration system leaves little room for the empowerment of citizens, especially the poor and vulnerable rural communities. The government began reviewing the current land policy in earnest in March 2017; though shorter terms continue to be suggested, no changes have been adopted to date.

Foreign investors in the telecom sector are required to disclose certain proprietary information to the ZDA as part of the regulatory approval process. Further information regarding information and communication regulation can be found at the website of the Zambia Information and Communication Technology Authority at http://www.zicta.zm 

The ZDA board screens all investment proposals and usually makes its decision within 30 days. The reviews appear routine and non-discriminatory and applicants have the right to appeal the investment board decisions. An investment application is screened to determine: the extent to which the proposed investment will help create employment; the development of human resources; the degree to which the project is export-oriented; the likely impact on the environment; the amount of technology transfer; and any other considerations the Board considers appropriate.

The following are the requirements for registering a foreign company in Zambia:

1. At least one and not more than nine local directors must be appointed as directors of a majority foreign-owned company. At least one local director of the company must be resident in Zambia, and if the company has more than two local directors, more than half of them shall be residents of Zambia.
2. There must be at least one documentary agent (a firm, corporate body registered in Zambia or an individual who is a resident in Zambia).
3. A certified copy of the Certificate of Incorporation from the country of origin must be attached to Form 46.
4. The charter, statutes, regulations, memorandum and articles, or other instrument relating to a foreign company must be submitted.
5. The Registration Fee of K4,170 (~ USD 250.00) must be paid.
6. The issuance and sealing of the Certificate of Registration marks the end of the process for registration.

This information can also be found at the web address of the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), http://www.pacra.org.zm 

Other Investment Policy Reviews

The GRZ conducted a trade policy review through the World Trade Organization (WTO) in June 2016. The report found that Zambia recorded relatively strong economic growth at an average rate of 6.6 percent per year up to 2015. The improvement was attributed to growing demand for copper (the main export product) and its spillover effects on some other sectors such as transport, communications, and wholesale and retail trade. Buoyant construction activity and higher agricultural production also helped.

The trade policy review report of 2016 reached the following conclusions: the government will continue to implement programs and initiatives directed at attaining inclusive growth and job creation and pay particular attention to macroeconomic stability, diversification of the economy, support to small and medium enterprises (SMEs), engagement with cooperating partners, and promotion of investment. Zambia also uses bilateral, regional, and multilateral frameworks to support economic growth and development.

Report found here: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp440_e.htm 

Business Facilitation

The Zambian government, often with support from cooperating partners, has undertaken economic reforms to improve its business facilitation process and attract foreign investors, including steps to support transparent policymaking and to encourage competition. The impact of these progressive policies, however, has been undermined by persistent fiscal deficits and widespread corruption. Business surveys generally indicate that corruption in Zambia is a major obstacle for conducting business in the country.

The Zambian Business Regulatory Review Agency (BRRA) manages Regulatory Services Centers (RSCs) that serve as a one-stop shop for investors. RSCs provide an efficient regulatory clearance system by streamlining business registration processes; providing a single licensing system; reducing the procedures and time it takes to complete the registration process; and increasing accessibility of business registration institutions by placing them under one roof.

The government established RSCs in Lusaka, Livingstone, Kitwe, and Chipata, and has plans to establish additional RSCs so that there is at least one in each of the country’s 10 provinces. Information about the RSCs can be found at the following links: http://www.brra.org.zm/index.php/656-2/ 

The Companies Act No. 10 of 2017 was operationalized through a statutory instrument (June 2018) and implementing regulations (February 2019) aimed at fostering accountability and transparency in the management of companies. Companies are required to maintain a register of beneficial owners, and persons holding shares on behalf of other persons or entities must now disclose those beneficial owners.

In order to facilitate improved access to credit the Patents and Company Registration Office (PACRA) established the collateral registry system, a central database that records all registrations of charges or collaterals created by borrowers to secure credits provided by lenders. This service allows lenders to search for collateral offered by loan applicants to see if that collateral already has an existing claim registered against it. Creditors can also register security interests against the proposed collateral to protect their priority status in accordance with the Movable Property (Security Interest) Act No. 3 of 2016. Generally, the first registered security interest in the collateral has first priority over any subsequent registrations.

Parliament passed the Border Management and Trade Facilitation Act in December 2018. The Act, among other things, calls for coordinated border management and control to facilitate the efficient movement and clearance of goods; puts into effect provisions for one-stop border posts; and simplifies clearance of goods with neighboring countries. While one-stop border posts have existed for several years and agencies are co-located at some border crossings, agencies still had conflicting regulations and processes. The new law seeks to harmonize outstanding issues.

Outward Investment

Through the Zambia Development Agency (ZDA), the government continues to undertake a number of activities to promote investment through provision of fiscal and non-fiscal incentives, establishment of Multi-Facility Economic Zones (MFEZs), the development of SMEs, as well as the promotion of skills development, productive investment, and increased trade. However, there is no incentive for outward investment nor is there any known government restriction on domestic investors from investing abroad.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Proposed laws and other statutory instruments are often insufficiently vetted with interest groups or are not released in draft form for public comment. Proposed bills are published on the National Assembly of Zambia website (http://www.parliament.gov.zm/ ) for public viewing. Hard copies of the documents are delivered by courier to the stakeholders’ premises/mailboxes.

Opportunities for comment on proposed laws and regulations sometimes exist through trade associations, such as the Zambia Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Zambia Association of Manufacturers, Zambia Chamber of Mines, and American Chamber of Commerce in Zambia. Stakeholder consultation in developing legislation and regulation has, however, generally been poor under the current administration. The government established the BRRA in 2014 with the mandate to administer the Business Regulatory Act. The Act requires public entities to submit for Cabinet approval a policy or proposed law that regulates business activity, after the policy or proposed law has BRRA approval. A public entity that intends to introduce any policy or law for regulating business activities should give notice, in writing, to the BRRA at least two months prior to submitting it to Cabinet; hold public consultations for at least 30 days with relevant stakeholders, and perform a Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA). The BRRA works in collaboration with the Ministry of Justice, which does not approve any proposed law to regulate business activity without the approval of BRRA. While this framework is solid on paper, the BRRA and the consultative process is still relatively new and unknown even by other government officials, and it appears that in some cases the BRRA is informed after the Ministry of Justice has already approved a law.

While there are clear public procurement guidelines, concerns persist regarding transparency and a level playing field for U.S. firms. To enhance the transparency, integrity, and efficiency of Zambia’s procurement system the GRZ launched the electronic government procurement (e-GP) in July 2016. In 2018, Cabinet approved legislation to repeal the Public Procurement Act of 2008 in order to introduce price benchmarking and expert estimates in tendering for capital projects and other high value goods and services, but Parliament has not passed the measure as of April 2020.

International Regulatory Considerations

On October 2, 2000, Zambia became a beneficiary of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) market access treaty with the United States, and was again found eligible for continuous benefits under AGOA in March 2019.

Zambia is a member of a number of regional and international groupings aimed at expanding markets for domestically produced goods and services. These include membership in both COMESA and SADC Free Trade Areas (FTAs). Zambia is also an active participant in the establishment of the Tripartite Free Trade Area between COMESA, SADC, and the East African Community (EAC).

In February 2019, Zambia signed the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA); as of the end of the first quarter of 2020, it still awaits ratification by Zambia’s Parliament. The trade agreement among 54 African Union member states creates a continent-wide single market, followed by the free movement of people and a single-currency union; much work remains to develop implementation protocols and mechanisms across Africa.

At the multilateral level, Zambia has been a WTO member since January 1, 1995. Zambia’s investment incentives program is transparent and has been included in the WTO’s trade policy reviews. The incentive packages are also subject to reviews by the Board of the ZDA and to periodic reviews by the Parliamentary Accounts Committee. Zambia is a signatory to the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) but still faces major challenges in expediting the movement, release, and clearance of goods, including goods in transit, which is a major requisite of the TFA. Zambia has benefited from duty-free and quota-free market access to the EU through its Everything but Arms FTA, and to the United States from the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) and AGOA agreements.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Zambia has a dual legal system that consists of statutory and customary law administered through a single formal court system. Statutory law is derived from the English legal system with some English Acts of Parliament still deemed to be in full force and effect within Zambia. Traditional and customary laws, which remain in a state of flux, are generally not written or codified, although some of them have been unified under Acts of Parliament. No clear definition of customary law has been developed by the courts, and there has not been systematic development of this subject.

Zambia has a written commercial law. The Commercial Court, a division of the High Court, deals with disputes arising out of commercial transactions. All commercial matters are registered in the commercial registry and judges of the Commercial Court are experienced in commercial law. Appeals from the Commercial Court, based on the amended January 2016 constitution, now fall under the recently established Court of Appeals, comprised of eight judges. The Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, Chapter 76, makes provision for the enforcement in Zambia of judgments given in foreign countries that accord reciprocal treatment. The registration of a foreign judgment is not automatic. Although Zambia is a state party to international human rights and regional instruments, it has a dualist system of jurisprudence that considers international treaty law as a separate system of law from domestic law. Domestication of international instruments by Acts of Parliament is necessary for these to be applicable in the country. Systematic efforts to domesticate international instruments are quite slow, but progressing.

The courts support Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and there has been an increase in the use of arbitration, mediation, and tribunals by litigants in Zambia. Arbitration is common in commercial matters and the proceedings are governed by the Arbitration Act No. 19 of 2000. The Act incorporates United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Zambian courts have no jurisdiction if parties have agreed to an arbitration clause in their contract. The establishment of the fee-based judicial commercial division in 2014 to adjudicate high-value claims has helped accelerate resolution of such cases.

The courts in Zambia are generally independent, but contractual and property rights enforcement is weak and final court decisions can take a prohibitively long time. At times, politicians have exerted pressure on the judiciary in politically controversial cases. Regulations or enforcement actions are appealable, and adjudication depends on the matter at hand and the principal law or act governing the regulations.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The major laws affecting foreign investment in Zambia include:

1. The Zambia Development Agency Act of 2006, which offers a wide range of incentives in the form of allowances, exemptions, and concessions to companies.
2. The Companies Act of 1994, which governs the registration of companies in Zambia.
3. The Zambia Revenue Authority’s Customs and Excise Act, Income Tax Act of 1966, and the Value Added Tax of 1995 provide for general incentives to investors in various sectors.
4. The Employment Code Act of 2019, Zambia’s basic employment law that provides for required minimum employment contractual terms.
5. The Immigration and Deportation Act, Chapter 123, regulates the entry into and residency in Zambia of visitors, expatriates, and immigrants.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Market competition operates under a relatively weak regulatory framework, although there is freedom of pricing, currency convertibility, freedom of trade, and free use of profits. A fairly strong institutional framework is provided for strategic sectors, such as mining and mining supply industries, and large-scale commercial farming. The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) is a statutory body established with a unique dual mandate to protect the competition process in the economy and to protect consumers. The mandate of the Commission cuts across all economic sectors. The CCPC regulates the economy to avoid restrictive business practices, abuse of dominant position of market power, anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions, and cartels that erode consumer welfare. The Commission is also mandated to enhance consumer welfare. In general terms, therefore, the principal aim of the Commission is to safeguard competition and ensure consumer protection, but it has been described as ineffectual and lacks legislative influence.

In 2016, the CCPC published a series of guidelines and policies that included adopting a formal Leniency Policy, a policy that encourages persons to report to the CCPC information that may help to uncover prohibited agreements. In certain circumstances, the person receives immunity from prosecution, imposition of fines, or the guarantee of a reduction in fines. The policy also calculates administrative penalties. In addition, the CCPC in 2016 published the draft Settlement Guidelines, which provide a formal framework for parties seeking to engage the CCPC for purposes of reaching a settlement.

The Competition and Fair Trading Act, Chapter 417, prevents firms from distorting the competitive process through conduct or agreements designed to exclude actual or potential competitors, and applies to all entities, regardless of whether private, public, or foreign. Although the Commission largely opens investigations when a complaint is filed, it can also open investigations on its own initiative. Zambian competition law can also be enforced by civil lawsuits in court brought by private parties and criminal prosecution by the Commission is possible in cartel cases without the involvement of the Director of Public Prosecution under the Competition and Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) No. 24 of 2010. However, the general perception is the Commission may be restricted in applying the competition law against government agencies and State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs), especially those protected by other laws.

Expropriation and Compensation

Zambia is a signatory to the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) of the World Bank and other international agreements. This guarantees foreign investment protection in cases of war, strife, disasters, and other disturbances, or in cases of expropriation. Zambia has signed bilateral reciprocal promotional and protection of investment protocols with a number of countries. The ZDA also offers further security for investments in the country through the signing of the Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (IPPAs).

Investments may only be legally expropriated by an act of Parliament relating to the specific property expropriated. Although the ZDA Act states that compensation must be at a fair market value, the method for determining fair market value is ill-defined. Compensation is convertible at the current exchange rate. The ZDA Act also protects investors from being adversely affected by any subsequent changes to the Investment Act of 1993 for seven years from their initial investment.

Leasehold land, which is granted under 99-year leases, may revert to the government if it is determined to be undeveloped after a certain amount of time, generally five years. Land title is sometimes questioned in court, and land is re-titled to other owners.

There is no pattern of discrimination against U.S. persons by way of an illegal expropriation by the government or authority in the country. There are no high-risk sectors prone to expropriation actions.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Zambia is party to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, which entered into force on June 7, 1959, and party to the Convention of the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States of 1965, which entered into force on October 14, 1966. These are enforced through the Investment Disputes Convention Act Chapter 42.

Zambia is a member state of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention and a signatory to the United Nations Commission of International Trade Law (UNCITRAL Model Law). In 2002, Zambia ratified the convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958 New York Convention).

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Over the past 10 years, previous disputes involved delayed payments from SOEs to U.S. companies for goods and services and the delayed deregistration of a U.S.-owned aircraft that was leased to a Zambian airline company that went bankrupt. Currently, a U.S. company is in dispute over the refusal of payment by its local joint venture partner that resulted from goods delivered to the government of Zambia. The case, however, has not officially reached Zambian courts.

Relatively few investment disputes involving U.S. companies have occurred since Zambia’s economy was liberalized following the introduction of multi-party democracy in 1991. The Zambian Investment Code stipulates that claimants must first file internal dispute claims with the Zambian High Court. Failing that, the parties may go to international arbitration. However, U.S. companies can encounter difficulties in receiving payments from the government for work performed or products and services rendered. This can be due to inefficient government bureaucracy or, more often, to a lack of funds available to the government to meet its obligations.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The Zambian Arbitration Act Number 19 of 2000 incorporates the UNCITRAL and the New York Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. The Act applies to both domestic and international arbitration and is based on the UNCITRAL model law. Foreign lawyers cannot be used to represent parties in domestic or international arbitrations taking place in Zambia. There are no facilities that provide online arbitration, although the Zambia Institute of Arbitrators promotes and facilitates arbitration and other forms of ADR. The New York Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards has been domesticated into Zambian legislation by virtue of Section 31 of the Arbitration Act. Arbitration awards are enforced in the High Court of Zambia, and judgments enforcing or denying enforcement of an award can be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The Bankruptcy Act, Chapter 82 provides for the administration of bankruptcy of the estates of debtors and makes provision for punishment of offenses committed by debtors. It also provides for reciprocity in bankruptcy proceedings between Zambia and other countries and for matters incidental to and consequential upon the foregoing. This applies to individuals, local, and foreign investors. Bankruptcy judgments are made in local currency but can be paid out in any internationally convertible currency. Under the Bankruptcy Act, a person can be charged as a criminal. A person guilty of an offense declared to be a felony or misdemeanor under the Bankruptcy Act in respect of which no special penalty is imposed by this Act shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

Zambia has made strides in improving its credit information system. Since 2008, the credit bureau, TransUnion, requires banks and some non-banks to provide loans requirement information and consult it when making loans. The credit bureau eventually captures data from other institutions such as utilities. The bureau’s coverage is still less than 10 percent of the population; the quality of information is suspect; and there is lack of clarity on data sources and the inclusion of positive information.

Real Property

Property rights and the regulation of property are well defined in principle, but face problems in implementation. Contractual and property rights are weak. Courts are often inexperienced in commercial litigation and are frequently slow in reaching their decisions. The ZDA Act ensures investors’ property rights are respected. Secured interests in property, both movable and real, are recognized and enforced. Property can be owned individually, jointly in undivided shares, or by an entity such as a company, close corporation or trust, or similar entity registered outside Zambia. The ZDA Act provides for legal protection and facilitates acquisition and disposition of all property rights such as land, buildings, and mortgages. The Lands and Deeds Registry Act of Zambia states that a mortgage is only to operate as security and not a transfer or lease of the estate or interest mortgaged. There are two types of mortgages in Zambia, a legal and an equitable mortgage. A legal mortgage is created in respect to a legal estate by deed. An equitable mortgage does not convey legal title to the mortgage, and no power of sale vests in the mortgagee.

The president holds all land on behalf of the people of Zambia, which he may give to any Zambian, but the process is set in law. The Lands Act, Chapter 184, places a number of restrictions on the president’s allocation of land to foreigners. The ZDA Act makes provision for leasehold tenure of land by investors. The ZDA, in consultation with the Ministry of Lands, assists an investor in identifying suitable land for investment, as well as assisting the investor to apply through the Ministry of Lands. While land is technically owned by the president, it is worth noting that traditional chiefs have jurisdiction over traditional, or customary, land, which makes up roughly 70 percent of Zambia.

The Commissioner of Lands verifies that properties can be transferred after checking if ground rent has been paid and conducting due diligence on the purchaser. As all land in Zambia belongs to the state, Zambians, Zambian companies, established residents, or investors can only lease it under lease terms established by law. Land held under customary tenure has no title, but where a sketch plan of the area exists, the chief can give written consent to an investor and a 14-year lease can be obtained for traditional land. In March 2017, the president expressed concern that land was being given to foreigners at an alarming rate by traditional chiefs and called for an inquiry into this by the Ministry of Lands, which had the lead in forming a new land policy. The current draft of the new land policy would assert more central government control over traditional lands and seeks to reduce the lease tenure on foreign-owned land from 99 years to renewable periods of 25 years. Both traditional chiefs and foreign investors have objected to terms in the draft bill, which has since stalled with Ministry of Lands and has not been presented to Parliament.

Despite Zambia’s abundant land for agriculture and other purposes, the process of land acquisition and registration is a major obstacle for investors. About 70 percent of available land is under traditional ownership. Its acquisition involves negotiations with traditional leaders who have to balance the demands of their subjects with the pressure to convert land for commercial purposes. Most available land has not been surveyed or mapped and where this has been done, records are often outdated or difficult to retrieve from the Ministry of Lands.

The Ministry of Lands is centralized in Lusaka and faces problems with poor record keeping and slow processing of title deeds. To address these challenges the government, with the support of donor partners, has been working to reform land policy, including modernization of the Lands Department at Ministry of Lands, establishment of Land Banks, establishment of a Land Development Fund, demarcation of MFEZs and industrial parks, and development of farming blocks.

Many of Zambia’s urban poor who live on statutory land are not aware of the ways in which they can secure their rights to land. Some civic leaders, cadres (political party supporters), and traditional leaders allocate and sell land without following required procedures. As such, many urban poor find refuge in unplanned settlements, which in some cases are not approved in accordance with Zambian law. This has led to the continued proliferation of informal and unplanned settlements, illegal land allocations, land grabbing, and misplacement of resources, all of which slow development.

People living on both customary land and in unplanned settlements therefore do so with a sense of insecurity of land tenure due to the absence of documentation to support land ownership coupled with a poor land administration system. Civil and traditional leaders have demonstrated little transparency and accountability in land governance. Most often, community members have little knowledge about either their land rights or how they can protect themselves.

Intellectual Property Rights

Intellectual property laws in Zambia cover such areas as domain names, traditional knowledge, transfer of technology, patents, and copyrights, etc. Zambia is also party to several international intellectual property agreements. The legal framework for trademark protection in Zambia is adequate. However, enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) is weak, and courts have little experience with commercial litigation. Copyright protection is limited and does not cover computer applications. Of the many pirated and counterfeit goods in Zambia, the main ones are: DVDs, CDs, audio-visual software, infant milk, pharmaceuticals, body lotions, motor vehicle spare parts (such as tires and brake pads), beverages, cigarettes, toothpaste, electrical appliances, fertilizer, pesticides, and corn seed. Small-scale trademark infringement occurs in connection with some packaged goods utilizing copied or deceptive packaging. In 2016, the government enacted the Industrial Designs Act and the Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources, and Expressions of Folklore Act. The Industrial Designs Act encourages the creation of designs and development of creative industries through enhanced protection and utilization of designs, and it provides for the registration and protection of designs and the rights of proprietors of registered designs. The Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources, and Expressions of Folklore Act provides a transparent legal framework for the protection of, access to, and use of, traditional knowledge, genetic resources, and expressions of folklore and guarantees equitable sharing of benefits and effective participation of holders.

The Zambia Police Service Intellectual Property Unit (IPU) carries out raids in shops and markets to confiscate counterfeit and pirated materials. The IPU tracks and reports on seizures of counterfeit goods, but no consolidated record is available. There are fines for revealing proprietary business information, but they are not large enough to adequately penalize possible disclosures. Zambia’s patent laws conform to the requirements of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, to which Zambia is a signatory. It takes a minimum of four months to patent an item or process. Duplicative patent searches are not performed, but patent awards may be appealed on grounds of infringement.

Zambia is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). In addition to the Paris Convention, Zambia is a signatory to a number of international agreements on patents and intellectual property, including the Berne Convention and the UNESCO Universal Copyright Convention. Zambia is also a member of the African Regional Industrial Property Organization (ARIPO). The country is a signatory to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which is an international legal agreement among all the member nations of the World Trade Organization.

The Ministry of Commerce, Trade, and Industry and the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) are the leading institutions responsible for the implementation of IPR laws in Zambia. The industrial property registration system at PACRA underwent an upgrade that linked its electronic documentation management system to WIPO’s WIPOScan, which provides for digitization of IPR records. Though major strides have been made in Zambia in the fight against piracy and counterfeiting, more needs to be done.

Zambia is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report nor its Notorious Markets List. For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment

In order to attract greater FDI and improve the country’s competitiveness, the government has encouraged public-private partnerships and emphasized the need to improve the investment climate by lowering the cost of doing business and restoring the rule of law and sanctity of contracts.  Implementation, however, has been limited.

Zimbabwe’s Indigenization and Economic Empowerment law limits the amount of shares owned by foreigners in the diamonds and platinum sectors to 49 percent with specific indigenous organizations owning the remaining 51 percent.  The government has signaled it intends to remove these restrictions.  There are also smaller sectors “reserved” for Zimbabweans.

The Zimbabwe Investment Authority (ZIA) promotes and facilitates both foreign direct investment and local investment.  ZIA facilitates and processes investment applications for approval.  ZIA’s website is http://www.investzim.com/ .  The country encourages companies to register with ZIA and the process currently takes approximately 90 days.  The government has formed a more powerful, but not yet fully functional streamlined entity (a “one-stop shop”) – the Zimbabwe Investment Development Authority (ZIDA).

While the government has committed to prioritizing investment retention, there are still no mechanisms or formal structures to maintain ongoing dialogue with investors.

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

While there is a right for foreign and domestic private entities to establish and own business enterprises and engage in all forms of remunerative activity, foreign ownership of businesses in the diamond and platinum sectors is limited to 49 percent (or less in certain reserved sectors), as outlined above.

In 2007, the government passed the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act, which required that “indigenous Zimbabweans” (i.e.  black Zimbabweans) own at least 51 percent of all enterprises valued over USD 500,000.  A March 2018 amendment to the law limits these restrictions to the diamond and platinum sectors.  The government has promised to repeal the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act by removing diamonds and platinum from the reserved list.  According to the Minister of Finance and Economic Development, shareholding on platinum and diamonds will be based on open negotiations between the government and interested investors.

Foreign investors are free to invest in the vast majority of non-resource sectors without any restrictions as the government aims to bring in new technologies, generate employment, and value-added manufacturing.  The government reserves certain sectors for Zimbabweans such as passenger buses, taxis and car hire services, employment agencies, grain milling, bakeries, advertising, dairy processing, and estate agencies.

The country screens FDI through the Zimbabwe Investment Authority (ZIA) in liaison with relevant line ministries to confirm compliance with the country’s investment regulations.  Once an investor meets the criteria, ZIA issues the company or entity with an investment certificate.

According to the country’s laws, U.S. investors are not especially disadvantaged or singled out by any of the ownership or control mechanisms relative to other foreign investors.  In its investment guidelines, the government states its commitment to non-discrimination between foreign and domestic investors and among foreign investors.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

In the past three years, the government has not conducted an investment policy review through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the World Trade Organization (WTO) or the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

Business Facilitation

Policy inconsistency, administrative delays and costs, and corruption hinder business facilitation.  Zimbabwe does not have a fully online business registration process, though one can begin the process and conduct a name search online via the ZimConnect web portal.  In February 2020, the government passed legislation creating the Zimbabwe Investment Development Agency (ZIDA) to act as a one-stop investment center (and to replace the still-operational Zimbabwe Investment Authority (ZIA)).  The ZIDA, which is still not fully functional, will house several agencies that play a role in the licensing, establishment, and implementation of investment projects including the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (Zimra), Environmental Management Agency (EMA), Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ), National Social Security Authority (NSSA), Zimbabwe Energy Regulatory Authority (ZERA), Zimbabwe Tourism Authority, the State Enterprises Restructuring Agency, and specialized investment units within relevant line ministries.

The Zimbabwe Investment Authority (ZIA) facilitates both foreign direct investment and local investment.  ZIA’s website is http://www.investzim.com/ . According to the World Bank, business registration requires nine distinct processes and takes an average of 27 days.

Outward Investment

Zimbabwe does not promote or incentivize outward investment due to the country’s tight foreign exchange reserves.  Although the government does not restrict domestic investors from investing abroad, any outward investment requires approval by exchange control authorities.  Firms interested in outward investment would face difficulty accessing the limited foreign currency at the more favorable official exchange rate.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

The government officially encourages competition within the private sector and seeks to improve the ease of doing business, but the bureaucracy within regulatory agencies still lacks transparency, and corruption is prevalent.  Investors have complained of policy inconsistency and unpredictability.

The government has introduced import taxes to protect certain inefficient producers who lobby for protection against more competitive imports.  In late 2012, the finance ministry announced a 25 percent surtax on selected imported products including soaps, meat products, beverages, dairy products, and cooking oil as well as other import taxes on beer, cigarettes, and chickens brought in from outside the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern African (COMESA) regions.  In 2016, the government banned the importation of a number of products manufactured locally, but in October 2018, the government removed many import license requirements to prevent shortages of basic commodities.

The government at times uses statutory instruments and temporary presidential powers to alter legislation impacting economic policy.  These powers have limited duration – the government must pass legislation within six months for the presidential powers to become permanent.  These sudden measures often surprise businesses and lack implementation details, leading firms to delay major business decisions until gaining clarity.  For example, a statutory instrument established the sudden prohibition on the use of foreign currency in June 2019, eliminating with no legislative discussion and no warning the decade-old policy of dollarization.  The standard legislative process, on the other hand, does provide ample opportunity for public review and comment before final passage.  The development of regulations follows a standard process and includes a period for public review and comment.

According to the Department of State’s 2019 Fiscal Transparency Report, public budget documents do not provide a full picture of government expenditures, and there is a notable lack of transparency regarding state-owned enterprises and the extraction of natural resources.  The information on public finances is generally unreliable, as actual revenue and expenditure have deviated significantly from the enacted budgets.  Information on some debt obligations is publicly available, but not information on contingent debt.

International Regulatory Considerations

Zimbabwe is a member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), and it is signatory to the SADC and COMESA trade protocols establishing free trade areas (FTA) with the aim of growing into a customs union.  Zimbabwe is also a member of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) which aims to create a single continental market, paving the way for the establishment of a customs union.  Although the country is also a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), it normally notifies only SADC and COMESA of measures it intends to implement.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

According to Zimbabwe’s law and constitution, Zimbabwe has an independent judicial system whose decisions are binding on the other branches of government.  The country has written commercial law and, in 2019, established four commercial courts at the magistrate level.  The government also trained 55 magistrates in the same year. Administration of justice in commercial cases that do not touch on political interests is still generally impartial, but for politicized cases government interference in the court system has hindered the delivery of impartial justice.  Regulations or enforcement actions are appealable and are adjudicated in the national court system.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

As noted above, in 2007, the government introduced the Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act requiring that “indigenous Zimbabweans” (black Zimbabweans) own at least 51 percent of all enterprises valued over USD 500,000, but now amended to apply only to the diamond and platinum sectors.  In certain sectors, such as primary agriculture, transport services, and retail and wholesale trade including distribution, foreign investors may not own more than 35 percent equity.

The Zimbabwe Investment Authority (ZIA) promotes and facilitates both foreign direct investment and local investment.  ZIA facilitates and processes investment applications for approval.  ZIA’s website is http://www.investzim.com/ .  The government passed legislation to create a more powerful, streamlined entity (a “one-stop shop”) – the Zimbabwe Investment Development Authority (ZIDA) in February 2020, but the agency is not yet operational.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The government officially encourages competition within the private sector according to the Zimbabwe Competition Act.  The Act provided for the formation of the Tariff and Competition Commission charged with investigating restrictive practices, mergers, and monopolies in the country.  The Competition and Tariff Commission (CTC) is an autonomous statutory body established in 2001 with the dual mandate of implementing and enforcing Zimbabwe’s competition policy and law and executing the country’s trade tariffs policy.

Expropriation and Compensation

In 2000, the government began to seize privately-owned agricultural land and transfer ownership to government officials and other regime supporters.  In April of that year, the government amended the constitution to grant the state’s right to assert eminent domain, with compensation limited to the improvements made on the land.  In September 2005, the government amended the constitution again to transfer ownership of all expropriated land to the government.  Since the passage of this amendment, top government officials, supporters of the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) party, and members of the security forces have continued to disrupt production on commercial farms, including those owned by foreign investors and those covered by bilateral investment agreements.  Similarly, government officials have sought to impose politically connected individuals as indigenous partners on privately and foreign-owned wildlife conservancies.

In 2006, the government began to issue 99-year leases for land seized from commercial farmers, retaining the right to withdraw the lease at any time for any reason.  These leases, however, are not readily transferable, and banks do not accept them as collateral for borrowing and investment purposes.  The government continues to seize commercial farms without compensating titleholders, who have no recourse to the courts.  The seizures continue to raise serious questions about respect for property rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe.

In 2017, the government announced its intention to compensate farmers who lost their land and made partial payments to the most vulnerable claimants. Negotiations between the government and farmers’ groups are ongoing.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Zimbabwe acceded to the 1965 Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States and to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in 1994.  However, the government does not always accept binding international arbitration of investment disputes between foreign investors and the state.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The government is signatory to a number of bilateral investment agreements with a number of countries (see above) in which international arbitration of investment disputes is recognized.  As noted above, Zimbabwe does not have a Bilateral Investment Treaty or Free Trade Agreement with an investment chapter with the United States.

Local courts recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards issued against the government, but there is a history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.  For example, senior politicians declined to support enforcement of a 2008 SADC Tribunal decision ordering Zimbabwe to return expropriated commercial farms to the original owners.  Once an investor has exhausted the administrative and judicial remedies available locally, the government of Zimbabwe agrees, in theory, to submit matters for settlement by arbitration according to the rules and procedures promulgated by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).  However, this has not occurred in practice.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Domestic legislation on arbitration is modeled after the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) model law, with minor modifications.  This law covers both domestic and international arbitration.  As noted above, local courts recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards issued against the government, but there is a history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.

Bankruptcy Regulations

In the event of insolvency or bankruptcy, Zimbabwe applies the Insolvency Act.  All creditors have equal rights against an insolvent estate.  In terms of resolving insolvency, Zimbabwe ranks 142 out of 190 economies in the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report.  Zimbabwe does not criminalize bankruptcy unless it is the result of fraud, but the government blacklists a person declared bankrupt from undertaking any new business.

Real Property

The government enforces property rights in residential and commercial properties in cities although this is not the case with agricultural land, as discussed above.  Mortgages and liens do exist for urban properties although liquidity constraints have led to a fall in the number of mortgage loans.  According to the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report, Zimbabwe is ranked 109 out of 190 countries in terms of registering property.  The recording of mortgages is generally reliable.  With regard to agricultural land, the government provides and protects the usage rights of indigenous people, i.e., black Zimbabweans.  The government retains ownership of all agricultural land with 99-year leases guaranteeing use.  These leases remain too weak to serve as collateral.

Intellectual Property Rights

Zimbabwe follows international patent and trademark conventions, and it is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).  Generally, the government seeks to honor intellectual property ownership and rights, although a lack of expertise and manpower as well as corruption limit its ability to enforce these obligations.  Pirating of videos, music, and computer software is common.

It does not appear that the government enacted new IP related laws or regulations over the past year.  The country does not publish information on the seizures of counterfeit goods.

Zimbabwe is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or Notorious Markets List.

For additional information about national laws, treaty obligations, and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at: https://www.wipo.int/directory/en/