Transparency of the Regulatory System

The government of Burkina Faso aims for transparency in law and policy to foster competition.  By law, prices of goods and services must be established according to fair and sound competition.  The government believes that cartels, the abuse of dominant position, restrictive practices, refusal to sell to consumers, discriminatory practices, unauthorized sales, and selling at a loss are practices that distort free competition.

At the same time, the price of some staple goods and services are still regulated by the government, including fuel, essential generic drugs, tobacco, cotton, school supplies, water, electricity, and telecommunications.

There are regulatory authorities for government procurement, for electronic communication and posts, for electricity, and for quality standards.

Provinces and municipalities have the power to regulate in their jurisdiction, but that regulation has a minimal effect on business entities.  There are several regulatory bodies at the national level and they usually internalize regulations enacted by international organizations.  Regulations exist at the supra-national level mostly through WAEMU and ECOWAS.

Burkina Faso’s legal, regulatory, and accounting systems are transparent and consistent with international norms.  Since January 2018, Burkina Faso as an Organization for the Harmonization of Corporate Law in Africa (OHCLA) member state adopted the revised version of the OHCLA accounting system.  It is composed of the Uniform Act on Accounting and Financial Law (AUDCIF); the OHADA General Accounting Plan (PCGO); the SYSCOHADA application guide, and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) application guide. The OHCLA accounting system complies with the IFRS norms.

There is no online Regulatory Disclosure. However, the regulations of the parliament allow the various commissions to hear civil society organizations wishing to share information to inform parliamentarians when they are examining bills.

International Regulatory Considerations

Burkina Faso is a member of the West African Economic Monetary Union (WAEMU) and the Economic Community of West African States.  There is a supranational relationship between these organizations and their state members.  Burkina Faso is also a member of the Organization for the Harmonization of Corporate Law in Africa (OHCLA).  As such, Uniform Laws adopted by the OHCLA are automatically part of the national legal system.

The Government of Burkina Faso regularly notifies all the draft technical barriers to the relevant WTO Committee.  In the October 2017 Trade Policy Review, the WTO congratulated WAEMU countries for their continued efforts to improve their international trading environment, especially through the implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA).  Burkina Faso has begun the ratification process of the TFA, but it has not yet completed it.  However, WAEMU and ECOWAS members already implement many of the TFA provisions.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

The legal system of Burkina Faso is the civil law. Contracts must always be performed in good faith. Burkina Faso has commercial courts that judge commercial cases. Commercial law is constituted by the uniform acts of the OHADA. The Commercial Code governs all matters that are not covered by the OHADA law.

The Burkinabe judiciary is independent despite press reports of cases of corruption of judges.  The Disciplinary Commission of the Judiciary has sanctioned corrupt judges. There are three degrees of jurisdiction in Burkina Faso allowing the loser to appeal a decision rendered in first instance.  In the event of a dispute over the execution of a contract, the plaintiff must first abstain a judgment from a court first and if the loser does not execute, the winner can retain a bailiff.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The investment code adopted by law 038-2018 demonstrates the government’s interest in attracting FDI to create industries that produce export goods and provide training and jobs for its domestic workforce.  The code provides standardized guarantees to all legally established firms operating in Burkina Faso, whether foreign or domestic.  It contains four investment and operations preference schemes, which are equally applicable to all investments, mergers, and acquisitions.

Burkina Faso’s regulations governing the establishment of businesses include most forms of companies admissible under French business law, including public corporations, limited liability companies, limited share partnerships, sole proprietorships, subsidiaries, and affiliates of foreign enterprises.  With each scheme, there is a corresponding set of related preferences, duty exceptions, corporate tax exemptions, and operation-related taxes.

Under the investment code, all personal and legal entities lawfully established in Burkina Faso, both local and foreign, are entitled to the following rights: fixed property, forest and industrial rights, concessions, administrative authorizations, access to permits, and participation in state contracts.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The National Commission for Competition and Consumption (Commission Nationale pour la Concurrence et la Consommation) reviews competition matters.  Some competition matters are under the aegis of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU).  Law No. 016-2017/AN of 27 April 2017 on organizing competition in Burkina Faso governs the competition sector.  This law is intended to create a free and transparent market, a guarantee of the development of a market economy driven by competitive and wealth-creating businesses.

Expropriation and Compensation

The Burkinabe constitution guarantees basic property rights.  These rights cannot be infringed upon except in the case of public necessity, as defined by the government.  This has rarely occurred.  Until 2007, all land belonged to the government but could be leased to interested parties.  The government reserves the right to expropriate land at any time for public use.  In instances where property is expropriated, the government must compensate the property holder in advance, except in the event of an emergency.

In 2007, Burkina Faso drafted a national land reform policy that recognizes and protects the rights of all rural and urban stakeholders to land and natural resources.  It also clarifies the institutional framework for conflict resolution at a local level, establishes a viable institutional framework for land management, and strengthens the general capacities of the government, local communities and civil society on land issues.

A 2009 rural land management law provides for equitable access to rural lands in order to promote agricultural productivity, manage natural resources, encourage investment, and reduce poverty.  It enables legal recognition of rights legitimated by traditional rules and practices.  In rural areas, traditional land tenure rules have long governed land transactions and allocations.  The 2009 law reinforces the decentralization and devolution of authority over land matters and provides for formalization of individual and collective use rights and the possibility of transforming these rights into private titles.

In 2012, the government revised the 2009 law, marking the end of exclusive authority of the state over all land.  It includes provisions to recognize local land use practices.  The new law provides conciliation committees to resolve conflicts between parties prior to any legal action.  There are several property rights recognition and protection acts, such as land charters, individual or collective land ownership certificates, and loan agreements that govern the nature, duration and counterparties for transfer rights between a landowner and a third party.

The first (2010-2014) Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact supported the establishment of local authorities and the issuance of titles as part of the land tenure reform process.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

The ICSID Convention entered into force for Burkina Faso on October 14, 1966.  In the event that an amicable settlement of a dispute between the government and an investor cannot be reached, the investment code requires that arbitration procedures be submitted to international arbitration under the rules outlined by the 1965 Convention of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), of which Burkina Faso is a member.  When the ownership of a company does not meet the nationality requirements laid out by Article 25 of the Convention, the code specifies that the dispute be resolved in accordance with the dispositions of the supplementary mechanisms approved by ICSID in September 1978.

Burkina Faso has been a member of the New York Convention since March 23, 1987.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Burkina Faso is a party to the Washington Convention of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and outlines arbitration procedures in its investment code as a means of solving investment disputes.  BITs signed by Burkina Faso provide for international arbitration.  Burkinabe courts accept international arbitration as a means for settling investment disputes between private parties.  Longstanding disputes that remain unresolved after administrative jurisdictional hearings may be submitted to arbitration.  Burkinabe courts recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards. The United States has not signed a BIT with Burkina Faso.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

Mediation and conciliation are available and encouraged in Burkina Faso.  In 2006, Burkina Faso introduced specialized commercial chambers in the general courts and in 2007 opened the Arbitration, Mediation and Resolution Center (Centre d’Arbitrage, de Mediation et de Conciliation de Ouagadougou (CAMCO)) under the auspices of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry.  (http://www.camco.bf/ ).  If a dispute is not settled by the CAMCO, the case can be referred to international bodies such as the International Chamber of Commerce of Paris.

The parliament adopted the Law number 047-2017 laying down modalities for intervention by the state jurisdictions on arbitration in Burkina Faso.  Burkina Faso is not a member of the Apostille Convention.  Consequently, any arbitral award rendered abroad should receive an exequatur before enforcement.

In 2016, a foreign mining company addressed an arbitration request to the International Chamber of Commerce’s International Court of Arbitration. The complaint stems from a dispute over the Tambao deposit in the northeastern corner of Burkina Faso. Prior to requesting arbitration in the Paris-based international court, the disputing parties seized the CAMCO.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Since Burkina Faso is a member of the OHADA, the Uniform Act on Bankruptcy is applicable.

There is no credit bureau in Burkina Faso.  The World Bank’s 2019 “Doing Business” report ranked Burkina Faso 107 out of 190 countries for Resolving Insolvency.

Real Property

Since the 2009 land tenure reform law, the government of Burkina Faso has been engaged in an effort to issue titles recognizing land ownership rights.  The first Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact focused on beginning this process in 47 communes, with plans for the government to expand the effort throughout the country.

Only about 5,000 land titles have been granted countrywide since 1960, according to the National Land Observatory, and the majority of those were issued pursuant to the first Millennium Challenge compact.  Obtaining a title is the last step in the process of land acquisition and is preceded by obtaining a use permit or an urban dwelling permit, developing the land, and paying applicable fees.  The title-holder becomes the owner of the surface and the subsoil.

Mortgages exist in Burkina Faso both for land and for structures.  Rules governing mortgages are set at the regional level by the West African Economic and Monetary Union, specifically under the Organization for the Synchronization of Business Rights in Africa (Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique des Droits des Affaires (OHADA).  Liens are not widely used.

Intellectual Property Rights

Burkina Faso’s legal system offiers protection for intellectual property rights (IPR), including  patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and semiconductor chip design.  In practice, however, government enforcement of IPR law is lax.  Burkina Faso is a destination point for counterfeit medicines, which can  be purchased readily on the street in Ouagadougou and Bobo-Dioulasso.

Burkina Faso is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the African Intellectual Property Organization (AIPO).  The national investment code guarantees foreign investors the same rights and protection as Burkinabe enterprises for trademarks, patent rights, labels, copyrights, and licenses.  In 1999, the government ratified both the WIPO Copyrights Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT).  In 2002, Burkina Faso was one of 30 countries that put the WCT and WPPT treaties into force.  The government has also issued several decrees and rules to implement the two treaties.

The implementation of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is under the purview of two ministries.  The first is the Office of Copyrights (le Bureau Burkinabe des Droits d’Auteurs, or BBDA) under the Ministry of Art, Culture and Tourism, which has the lead for copyright and related rights.  The National Directorate of Industrial Property under the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Handicrafts has the lead for industrial property issues.  These two authorities have the technical competence to identify needs.  Arrangements are underway to assess the needs for the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement in Burkina Faso.

Statistics on the seizure of counterfeit goods are available upon request from the relevant agency.  For example, the BDDA tracks seizures  pertaining to artistic material, and the  the National Directorate of Industrial Property tracks seizures pertaining to pharmaceuticals..

Burkina Faso is not cited in the United States Trade Representative  (USTR) Special 301 Reports or the Notorious Markets List.

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Chad implements laws to foster competition and establish clear rules based on Uniform Acts produced by the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA, Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires, www.ohada.com ). However, certain Chadian and foreign companies may encounter difficulties from well-established companies with a corner on the market that discourages competition.

Regulations and financial policies generally do not impede competition in the financial sector. Legal, regulatory, and accounting systems pertaining to banking are transparent and consistent with international norms. Chad began using OHADA’s accounting system in 2002, bringing its national standards into harmony with accounting systems throughout the region. Several international accounting firms have offices in Chad. However, while accounting, legal, and regulatory procedures are consistent with international norms, some local firms do not use generally accepted standards and procedures in their business practices.

Chad develops forward regulatory plans to encourage foreign investment and budget support. Government ministries draft regulations, subject to approval by the Secretary General of the Government, Council of Ministers, National Assembly, and President. National regulations are most relevant to foreign investors. There are no informal regulatory processes managed by nongovernmental organizations or private sector associations. The GOC occasionally provides opportunities for local associations, such as the National Council of Employers (CNPT, Conseil National du Patronat Tchadien) or the CCIAMA to comment on proposed laws and regulations pertaining to investment. All contracts and practices are subject to legal review, which can be weak.

The Government publishes all budget information, including on the Ministry of Finance and Budget website. Other proposed laws and regulations are not published in draft form for public comment. The Observatory on Public Finance is an online framework for the dissemination of public finance data and the operationalization of the Code of Transparency and Good Governance. This code is an implementation of one of the six CEMAC Directives on the new harmonized framework for public financial management.

The Presidential Council to Improve the Business Climate was announced in 2018 and inaugurated in late 2019. This effort to reform Chad’s investment climate and improve Chad’s performance in World Bank assessments is still in its embryonic stage. The global spread of COVID-19 in early 2020 drew the GOC’s attention to pandemic response.

Chad is not listed on www.businessfacilitation.org .

International Regulatory Considerations

Chad has been a member of the WTO since October 19, 1996 and a member of GATT since July 12, 1963. Chad is a member of OHADA and the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC, Communaute Economique et Financiere de l’Afrique Centrale, www.cemac.int ). Since 2017, Chad is gradually implementing business and economic laws and regulations based on CEMAC standards and OHADA Uniform Acts. Chad’s banking sector is regulated by COBAC (Commission Bancaire de l’Afrique Centrale), a regional agency.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

Chad’s legal system and commercial law are based on the French Civil Code. The constitution recognizes customary and traditional law if it does not interfere with public order or constitutional rights. Chad’s judicial system rules on commercial disputes in a limited technical capacity. The Chadian President appoints judges without National Assembly confirmation, and thus the judiciary may be subject to executive influence. Courts normally award monetary judgments in local currency, although it may designate awards in foreign currencies based on the circumstances of the disputed transaction.

Chad’s commercial laws are based on standards promulgated by CEMAC, OHADA, and the Economic Community of Central African States (CEEAC, Communaute Economique des Etats de l’Afrique Centrale, http://www.ceeac-eccas.org ). The Government and National Assembly are in the process of adopting legislation to comply fully with all these provisions.

Specialized commercial tribunal courts were authorized in 1998 and operationalized in 2004. These tribunals exist in five major cities but lack adequate technical capacity to perform their duties. Firms not satisfied with judgments in these tribunals may appeal to OHADA’s regional court in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, that ensures uniformity and consistent legal interpretations across its member countries. Several Chadian companies have done so. OHADA also allows foreign companies to utilize tribunals outside of Chad, generally in Paris, France, to adjudicate business disputes. Finally, CEMAC established a regional court in N’Djamena in 2001 to hear business disputes, but this body is not widely used.

Contracts and investment agreements can stipulate arbitration procedures and jurisdictions for settlement of disputes. If both parties agree and settlements do not violate Chadian law, Chadian courts will respect the decisions of courts in the nations where particular agreements were signed, including the United States. This principle also applies to disputes between foreign companies and the Chadian Government. Such disputes can be arbitrated by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Foreign companies frequently choose to include clauses in their contract to mandate ICC arbitration.

Bilateral judicial cooperation is in effect between Chad and certain nations. Chad signed the Antananarivo Convention in 1970, covering the discharge of judicial decisions and serving of legal documents, with eleven other former French colonies (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, CAR, Congo-Brazzaville, Gabon, Cote d’Ivoire, Madagascar, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal). Chad has similar arrangements in place with France, Nigeria, and Sudan.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The National Investment Charter encourages foreign direct investment. Chad is a member of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC, Communaute Economique et Financiere de l’Afrique Centrale, www.cemac.int ) and the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA, Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires, www.ohada.com ). Since 2017, Chad is gradually implementing business and economic laws and regulations based on CEMAC standards and OHADA Uniform Acts.

Foreign investors using the court system are not generally subject to executive interference. In addition, the OHADA Treaty allows foreign companies to utilize tribunals outside of Chad, e.g., the ICC in Paris, France, to adjudicate any disputes. Companies may also access the OHADA’s court located in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire.

Foreign businesses interested in investing in or establishing an office in Chad should contact ANIE, which offers a one-stop shop for filing the legal forms needed to start a business. The process officially takes 72 hours and is the most important legal requirement for investment. ANIE’s website (www.anie-tchad.com ) provides additional information.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

Regulation of competition is covered by the OHADA Uniform Acts that form the basis for Chadian business and economic laws and regulations. The Office of Competition in Chad’s Ministry of Industrial and Commercial Development & Private Sector Promotion reviews transactions for competition-related concerns.

Expropriation and Compensation

Chadian law protects businesses from nationalization and expropriation, except in cases where expropriation is in the public interest. There were no government expropriations of foreign-owned property in 2019. There are no indications that the GOC intends to expropriate foreign property in the near future.

Chad’s Fourth Republic Constitution adopted in May 2018 prohibits seizure of private property except in cases of urgent public need, of which there are no known cases. A 1967 Land Law prohibits deprivation of ownership without due process, stipulating that the state may not take possession of expropriated properties until 15 days after the payment of compensation. The government continues to work on reform of the 1967 law.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

Chad has been a signatory and contracting state of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (“ICSID Convention”) since 1966.

Chad is not a contracting state of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (“New York Arbitration Convention”).

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Chad is signatory to an investment agreement among the member states of CEMAC, CEAC, and OHADA. The OHADA Investment Arrangement, with provisions for securities, arbitration, dispute settlement, bankruptcy, recovery, and other aspects of commercial regulation, has defined the commercial rights of several economic stakeholders, e.g., the Chadian Treasury, and provides for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Chad has no Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) or Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with an investment chapter with the United States.

There is no formal record of the government’s handling of investment disputes. Some U.S. and other foreign investors have been involved in disputes with the GOC, particularly over issues regarding taxes and duties, though there are no official statistics. Investment disputes involving foreign investors are frequently arbitrated by an independent body.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

In addition to independent courts, such as the ICC, Chad’s constitution recognizes customary and traditional law as long as it does not interfere with public order or constitutional rights. As most businesses operate in the informal sector, customary and traditional law function as alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms when parties are from the same tribe or clan and express their desire to settle outside of the formal court.

Specialized commercial tribunal courts were authorized in 1998 and became operational in 2004. These tribunals exist in five major cities but lack adequate capacity to perform their duties. The N’Djamena Commercial Tribunal has heard disputes involving foreign companies.

Foreign investors using the court system are not generally subject to executive interference. In addition, the OHADA Treaty allows foreign companies to utilize tribunals outside of Chad, e.g., the ICC in Paris, France, to adjudicate any disputes. Companies may also access OHADA’s court located in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire.

Bankruptcy Regulations

Chad’s bankruptcy laws are based on OHADA Uniform Acts. According to Section 3, Articles 234 – 239 of OHADA’s Uniform Insolvency Act, creditors and equity shareholders may designate trustees to lodge complaints or claims to the commercial court collectively or individually. These laws criminalize bankruptcy and the OHADA provisions grant Chad the discretion to apply its own sentences.

The World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report ranks Chad’s ease of resolving insolvency  at 155 of 190. This is a decrease of five positions from 2018. https://www.doingbusiness.org/en/data/exploreeconomies/chad/#resolving-insolvency

Real Property

The Chadian Civil Code protects property rights. Since 2013, landowners may register land titles with the One-Stop Land Titling Office (Guichet Unique pour les Affaires Foncieres). However, enforcement of these rights is difficult because a majority of landowners do not have a title or a deed for their property.

The office of Domain and Registration (Direction de Domaine et Enregistrement) in the Ministry of Finance and Budget is responsible for recording property deeds and mortgages. In practice, this office asserts authority only in urban areas; rural property titles are managed by traditional leaders who apply customary law. Chadian courts frequently deal with cases of multiple or conflicting titles to the same property. In cases of multiple titles, the earliest title issued usually has precedence. Fraud is common in property transactions. By law, all land for which no title exists is owned by the government and can only be given to a separate entity by Presidential decree. There have been incidents in which the government has reclaimed land for which individuals held titles, which government officials granted to other individuals without the backing of Presidential decrees.

The GOC does not provide clear definitions and protections of traditional use rights of indigenous peoples, tribes, or farmers.

The World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report ranks Chad 131 of 190 in ease of registering property. The report cites the high cost of property valuation plus other associated costs for registering property as the major impediment. Time required and number of procedures are on par with the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa.

Intellectual Property Rights

Chad is a member of the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Chad ratified the revised Bangui Agreement (1999) in 2000 and the Berne Convention in 1971. The GOC adheres to OAPI rules within the constraints of its administrative capacity.

Within the Ministry responsible for trade, the Department of Industrial Property and Technology addresses intellectual property rights (IPR) issues. This department is the National Liaison Unit (SNL) within the OAPI and is the designated point of contact under Article 69 of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Counterfeit pharmaceuticals and artistic works, including music and videos, are common in Chad. Counterfeit watches, sports clothing, footwear, jeans, cosmetics, perfumes, and other goods are also readily available on the Chadian market. These products are not produced locally and are generally imported through informal channels. Despite limited resources, Chadian customs officials make occasional efforts to enforce copyright laws, normally by seizing and burning counterfeit medicines, CDs, and mobile phones.

Chad does not regularly track and report on seizures of counterfeit goods. Chadian authorities will occasionally announce such a seizure in the local press. Customs officers have the authority to seize and destroy counterfeit goods ex officio. The Government pays for storage and destruction of such goods.

Chad is not listed 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 WIPO’s country profiles at http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .

The DRC does not have a legal system to address the issue of competition.  By joining the regional legal body OHADA and the regional Central and Southern African trade group COMESA, the DRC plans to implement the standards and regulations of these structures in order to create a more transparent and effective policy to promote competition.

There are no informal regulations run by private or nongovernmental organizations that discriminate against foreign investors.  However, some investors perceive the regulations in the mining code as discriminatory against foreign investment.

The GDRC authority on business standards, the Congolese Office of Control (OCC), oversees foreign businesses engaged in the DRC.

There are no formal or informal provisions systematically employed by the GDRC to impede foreign investment.  Companies most often complain of facing administrative hurdles as laws and regulations are often poorly or unevenly applied.

Proposed laws and regulations are rarely published in draft format for public discussion and comment;  discussion is typically limited to the governmental entity that proposes the draft law and Parliament prior to enactment.  Sometimes the government will hold a public hearing after public appeals.

By implementing the OHADA system, the GDRC strengthened its legal framework in the areas of contract, company, and bankruptcy law and set up an accounting system better aligned to international standards.  For this purpose, a Coordination Committee was established internally in the GDRC to monitor OHADA implementation.

The government announced the creation of a business unit (CCA) in December 2019 to enact needed regulatory reforms.

The DRC is a member of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), a multi-stakeholder initiative to increase transparency in transactions between governments and companies in the extractive industries.  The DRC’s validation process for compliance with the EITI Standard commenced in November 2018, with an assessment due in 2020.  The initial report published by the International EITI Secretariat in April 2019 stated that the DRC EITI failed to adequately address 13 of the  requirements of the EITI Standard, with two of these assessed as unmet with inadequate progress.  The report also stressed the need to clarify the financial flows of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in the DRC’s extractive sector.

In 2019 the DRC failed to meet the minimum requirements of fiscal transparency according to the State Department’s Fiscal Transparency report.  While the DRC publishes budgets that are publicly available and timely, the published budgets were not reliable indicators of actual government spending.

International Regulatory Considerations

The DRC is a member of several regional economic blocs, including the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), and the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Countries (ECGLC).

According to the Congolese National Standardization Committee, the DRC has adopted 470 harmonized COMESA standards.

The DRC is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and seeks to comply with Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIM) requirements, including notifying regulations to the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT).

Legal System and Judicial Independence

The DRC is a civil law country, and the main provisions of its private law can be traced to the Napoleonic Civil Code.  The general characteristics of the Congolese legal system are similar to those of the Belgian system.  Various local customary laws regulate both personal status laws and property rights, especially the inheritance and land tenure systems in traditional communities throughout the country.  The Congolese legal system is divided into three branches: public law, private law and economic law.  Public law regulates legal relationships involving the state or state authority; private law regulates relationships between private persons; and economic law regulates interactions in areas such as labor, trade, mining and investment.

In 2018 the DRC established thirteen commercial courts located in DRC’s main business cities, including Kinshasa, Lubumbashi, Matadi, Boma, Kisangani, and Mbuji-Mayi.  These courts are designed to be led by professional judges specializing in commercial matters and exist in parallel to an otherwise inadequate judicial system.  A lack of qualified personnel and a reluctance by some DRC jurisdictions to fully recognize OHADA law and institutions have hindered the development of commercial courts.

The current judicial process is not procedurally reliable and its rulings are not always respected.  The current executive branch has generally not interfered with the proceedings.  The national court system provides an appeals mechanism under the OHADA framework.  Legal documents in the DRC can be found at: http://www.leganet.cd/index.htm .

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

The 2002 Investment Code governs most foreign direct investment (FDI), providing for the protection of investments.  In practice, an inadequate legal system has insufficiently protected foreign investors in the event of a dispute.  Mining, hydrocarbons, finance, and other sectors have sector-specific investment laws.

ANAPI is the DRC agency with the mandate to simplify the investment process, make procedures more transparent, assist new foreign investors, and improve the image of the country as an investment destination (www.investindrc.cd).

The GDRC has a “Guichet Unique,” which is a one-stop shop to simplify business creation, cutting processing time from five months to three days, and reducing incorporation fees from USD 3,000 to USD 120. (www.guichetunique.cd ). A “one-stop-shop” also exists for import-export business, covering aspects such as the collection of taxes and transshipment operations. (https://segucerdc.cd/ ).

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

There is no national agency that reviews transactions for competition or antitrust-related concerns.  As a member of COMESA the DRC follows the COMESA Competition Regulations and rules, and the COMESA competition body regulates competition.

Expropriation and Compensation

The GDRC may proceed with an expropriation when it benefits the public interest, and the person or entity subject to an expropriation should receive fair compensation.  The U.S. Embassy is unaware of any new expropriation activities by the GDRC against U.S. citizens in the past three years, but there are a number of existing and long-standing claims made against the GDRC.  Some claims have been taken to arbitration, though many arbitral judgments against the GDRC are not paid in a timely manner, if at all.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

The DRC is a member of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention and a Contracting State to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention).  It is important to note that the New York Convention does not apply toward disputes relating to immovable property, which includes mining rights.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

The DRC is subject to international arbitration.  A U.S. mining company  sued under the BIT to recover losses suffered when FARDC troops sacked its mine in Kasai Central Province in 1995. The arbitration courts ruled the GDRC liable for damages totaling USD 13 million, and the GDRC started paying back the awarded amount plus interest to the U.S. company.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The DRC adopted the OHADA Uniform Act on Arbitration (the UAA).  The UAA sets out the basic rules applicable to any arbitration where the seat of arbitration is located in an OHADA member state.  The requirements set out under Article 5 of the New York Convention for the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards applies where the seat of any arbitration is outside an OHADA member state, or where the parties choose arbitration rules outside the UAA.

OHADA‘s UAA offers an alternative dispute resolution mechanism for settling disputes between two parties where the place of arbitration is situated in a Member State.  Disputes must be submitted to the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA) in Abidjan in accordance with the provisions of the OHADA Treaty and the OHADA Arbitration Rules.

The UAA, while not directly based on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law, is similar in that it provides for the recognition and enforcement of arbitration agreements and arbitral awards and supersedes the national laws on arbitration to the extent that any conflict arises.  Arbitral awards with a connection to an OHADA member state are given final and binding status in all OHADA member states, on par with a national court judgment.  Support is provided by the CCJA which can rule on the application and interpretation of the UAA.

Arbitral awards rendered in any OHADA Member State are enforceable in any other OHADA member state, subject to obtaining an exequatur (a legal document issued by a sovereign authority allowing a right to be enforced in the authority’s domain of competence) of the competent court of the State in which the award is to be made.  Exequaturs are granted unless the award clearly affects public order in that State.  Decisions granting or refusing to grant an exequatur may be appealed to the CCJA.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The OHADA Uniform Act on Insolvency Proceedings provides a comprehensive framework not only for companies encountering financial difficulties and seeking relief from the pressing demands of creditors, but also for creditors to file their claims.  The GDRC judiciary system has agreed to enforce the OHADA Insolvency Act.  Bankruptcy is not criminalized.

According to the World Bank’s Doing Business Report, there were no foreclosure, liquidation or reorganization proceedings filed in the country in 2019, making it impossible to assess the time, cost or outcome for an insolvency proceeding.

Real Property

The DRC’s Constitution protects private property ownership without discriminating between foreign and domestic investors.  Despite this provision, the GDRC has acknowledged the absence of enforcement protecting property rights.  Congolese law related to real property rights enumerates provisions for mortgages and liens. Real property (buildings and land) is protected and registered through the Ministry of Land’s Office of the Mortgage Registrar.  Land registration may not fully protect property owners, as records can be incomplete and legal disputes over land deals are common.  Many owners lack a clear registered title to the land.  In addition, there is no specific regulation of real property lease or acquisition.

Ownership interest in personal property (e.g. equipment, vehicles, etc.) is protected and registered through the Ministry of the Interior’s Office of the Notary.

Intellectual Property Rights

Intellectual property rights (IPR) are legally protected in the DRC, but enforcement of IPR regulations is limited.  The DRC’s intellectual property laws date from the 1980s and remain in force. However,  enforcement is weak, and IPR theft is common.  The country is a signatory to a number of relevant agreements with international organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) and is subject to the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).   The government does not keep a record of IPR violations.

The DRC is not included in the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or Notorious Markets List.

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

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/ .

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.

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/ .

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Bureaucratic procedures for opening a business are long and cumbersome, particularly for foreigners trying to navigate the system without the assistance of a well-connected national.

The private sector is governed by a mix of laws from Sudan, the pre-independence semi-autonomous Government of Southern Sudan, and since 2011, the Government of South Sudan. The Transitional National Legislative Assembly (TNLA) passed laws to improve the transparency of the regulatory system, including the 2012 Companies Act and the 2012 Banking Act, however enforcement regulations are still lacking and there is little transparency. The government does not consult with the public about proposed regulations and information about regulations is not widely published. Several key pieces of legislation governing customs, imports and exports, leasing and mortgaging, procurement, and labor have not been approved by the government and are needed to improve the business environment in South Sudan.

The oil sector is the major industry that attracts FDI, but transparency in the oil sector is absent, despite it being mandated by law. The Ministry of Petroleum does not share data at an institutional level with the Bank of South Sudan and does not release it to the public. The Ministry of Petroleum does not publish oil production data. The contract process for oil companies that are planning to bid and invest in South Sudan is controlled by the Ministry of Petroleum, but the law appears to grant this authority exclusively to the National Petroleum and Gas Commission. Bidding and tender information is not publicly available.

There are no known informal regulatory processes managed by NGOs or private sector associations that would affect U.S. investors. National and state bodies are the main source of regulation, but county and sub-county level officials also impose regulations. In 2018 and 2019, international non-governmental organizations regularly reported that local officials demanded taxes and fees that differed with those set out in national policy. An opaque Presidential Decree issued in late 2018, for example, resulted in weeks of customs clearance disruptions at the country’s main land border in Nimule. COVID regulations also created delays in the spring of 2020. NGOs report regular discrepancies between tax and labor rules issued by the national government and those enforced by local authorities. At some state levels, private contractors moving goods earmarked for humanitarian relief have been prevented entry at state borders. Failure by the transitional government to establish leadership for states and administrative areas as of April 2020 has further complicated the tax regime nationally.

There are no publicly listed companies. Government accounting is non-transparent. In 2019, the legislative assembly held public budget hearings, but in general, most bills and regulations are passed without public comment and are poorly disseminated. There is no centralized online location where key regulatory actions are published. There is no ombudsman. Parliament has not been able to provide effective oversight of government ministers. There were no significant corruption cases prosecuted in 2019.

No enforcement reforms have been announced or implemented. The establishment of the National Revenue Authority was expected to provide a stronger foundation for development and implementation of accounting and regulatory standards. South Sudan is working to develop sources of non-oil revenue, including more centralized and effective enforcement of personal income tax. If transparently collected and managed, these funds could assist in development of the country’s infrastructure. The summary removal of the former National Revenue Authority Commissioner General in 2019 casts doubt on whether there is enough political will to achieve such goals.

South Sudan’s parliament is responsible for developing laws, but bodies such as the National Revenue Authority have also been influential in developing tax procedures, for example. There is no indication that regulations are informed by quantitative analysis and public comments received by regulators are not made public.

Laws and regulations are randomly enforced and are not well-publicized, creating uncertainty among domestic and foreign investors. The Ministry of Labor, for example, rarely if ever conducts inspections, but NGOs and foreign investors have reported that employees have colluded with labor inspectors to extort fines from business managers.

South Sudan’s public finances are extremely opaque. The government released some debt obligation information during budget hearings in 2018 regarding certain infrastructure loans, but to date has not disclosed the amount of forward-sold oil (the country’s main source of revenue). As of March 2019, the IMF evaluated short-term oil advances at USD 338 million or 7.3 percent of GDP but noted that this estimate might not capture all outstanding advances as authorities were unable to provide a full list of contracted oil advances and their repayment terms, complicating fiscal projections. The FY 2019/2020 budget infrastructure expenditure line increased to USD 611 million. At 47 percent of total expenditures, this was a large increase by percentage, up from three percent of total expenditures in FY 2018/2019. Per documents from the third reading of the budget, roughly USD 602 million of this increase will go to the Road Infrastructure Fund. It is widely understood these monies will be used to pay for the USD 711 million oil-collateralized road construction contract with Chinese-firm Shandong Hi-Speed Group for the Juba-Rumbek road. The government also plans to build two additional roads (Nadapal-Torit-Juba-Bor and Kaya-Yei-Raja) though no further details have been released.

In the energy sector an Egyptian company called Elswedy Electric Company in December 2019 signed a contract with the government of South Sudan, represented by South Sudan’s Ministry of Energy and Dams to build a USD 45 million hybrid photovoltaic project with a battery storage system. The contract includes engineering, procurement, and installation of the project by Elswedy Electric, and the project is scheduled to be operational in 2020. The project was not reviewed by parliament as required by law.

International Regulatory Considerations

South Sudan became a member of the African Union in 2012 and the East African Community (EAC) in April 2016. It is making progress in adapting its national regulatory system to regional standards. South Sudan has joined the customs union of the EAC but is behind in implementing regulations. With the establishment of the National Revenue Authority, South Sudan had begun to implement EAC customs regulations and procedures. In March 2020, the President established the Ministry of East African Community Affairs in accordance with the peace agreement, which is tasked with overseeing integration into the EAC. South Sudan currently has nine members in EAC parliament and one South Sudanese judge in the EAC Court of Justice. While the government claimed it paid its arrears to the EAC in the fall of 2019, this has not been independently confirmed. South Sudan is not a member of the WTO.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

South’s Sudan’s legal system is a combination of statutory and customary laws. There are no dedicated commercial courts and no effective arbitration act for handling business disputes. The only official means of settling disputes between private parties in South Sudan is civil court, but enforcement of court decisions is weak or nonexistent. The lack of official channels for businesses to resolve land or other contractual disagreements has led businesses to seek informal mediation, including through private lawyers, tribal elders, law enforcement officials, and business organizations. As a part of its membership in the EAC, South Sudan is subject to the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice (EACJ). The EAC treaty gives the EACJ broad jurisdiction including trade disputes and human rights violations, but the court only reviews 40 cases annually and results for South Sudanese legal community have been inconclusive.

The executive regularly interferes in judiciary matters. Parties to business disputes have been arrested by state security forces and held at length without charges. High-level government and military officials are often immune from prosecution in practice, and frequently interfere with court decisions. Parties in contract disputes are sometimes arrested by authorities and imprisoned until the party agrees to pay a sum of money, often without going to court and sometimes without formal charges.

The lack of a unified, formal system encourages ‘forum shopping’ by businesses that are motivated to find the venue in which they can achieve an outcome most favorable to their interests. Many disputes are resolved informally. U.S. companies seeking to invest in South Sudan face a complex commercial environment with extraordinarily weak enforcement of the law. While major U.S. and multinational companies may have enough leverage to extricate themselves from business disputes, medium-sized enterprises that are more natural counterparts to South Sudan’s fledgling business community will find themselves held to local rules.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Despite some improvements to the taxation system, the opacity and lack of capacity in the country’s legal system poses high risk to foreign investors. South Sudan’s National Revenue Authority had centralized and standardized collection of Personal Income Tax and customs duties but many of these gains appear to have been lost since the removal of the Commissioner General in August 2019. A One-Stop Shop Investment Centre (OSSIC) was established in 2012 but there is no website or advertised physical office. In practice, someone who wishes to register a business must rely on a local lawyer to register the business with the registrar at the Ministry of Justice and with other relevant authorities such as tax authorities.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

South Sudan does not review transactions for competition-related concerns. There were no significant developments in 2019.

Expropriation and Compensation

The Investment Promotion Act of 2009 prohibits nationalization of private enterprises unless the expropriation is in the national interest for a public purpose. However, the current law does not define the terms “national interest” or “public purpose.” According to the law, expropriation must be in accordance with due process and provide for fair and adequate compensation, which is ultimately determined by the local domestic courts.

Government officials have pressured development partners to hand over assets at the end of programs. While some donor agreements call for the government to receive goods at the close-out of a project, assets have been seized by local government officials even in instances where they were not included in a formal agreement.

Although officially denied, credible reports from humanitarian aid agencies indicate that money is routinely extorted at checkpoints manned by both government and opposition forces to allow the delivery of humanitarian aid throughout the country.

In practice, the government has not offered compensation for expropriated property. For example, in October 2018 the government expropriated the assets of Kerbino Wol Agok, a high-profile prisoner of the National Security Service, with no apparent judicial process. The government seized his companies and their bank accounts, and all employees fired. In 2019, a court sentenced Kerbino to ten years in prison for acts committed after his arrest; he was released in January 2020 under presidential pardon.

Due to the insufficiencies in the legal system, investors should not expect to receive due process or have the terms of their contracts honored. Investors face a complex commercial environment with relatively weak enforcement of the law.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

South Sudan signed and ratified the ISCID Convention on April 18, 2012 and it entered into force on May 18, 2012. Currently South Sudan is not a signatory to the convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958 New York Convention).

There is no specific domestic legislation that enforces awards under the ICSID convention.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

South Sudan does not have a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) or Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States.

Numerous private companies, including at least one U.S. company, claim the government has reneged on or delayed payment for work under contract in recent years. For example, in November 2017, South Sudan stopped issuing and renewing passports and other travel documents after its production system was shut down for two weeks by the country’s German supplier, due to the government’s failure to pay an annual software license fee of around USD 500,000. The government again failed to pay its annual fees in November 2019 and the service provider stopped issuing passports for South Sudan for two weeks – the last week of December 2019 and the first week of January 2020.

In March 2018, the government suddenly suspended a Lebanese-owned cell phone service provider, which had previously been South Sudan’s largest telecommunications company with a 51 percent market share and equipment installed throughout the country, due to an alleged failure to pay taxes.

There is a history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors. Parties in contract disputes are sometimes arrested and imprisoned until the party agrees to pay a sum of money, often without going to court and sometimes without formal charges.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

There are no official arbitration bodies in South Sudan. South Sudan lacks any dedicated legal framework for rendering enforceable court judgments from foreign courts.

As a part of its membership in the EAC South Sudan is subject to the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice (EACJ). The EAC treaty gives the EACJ broad jurisdiction beyond trade disputes, including human rights violations. Though results have proved inconclusive, members of South Sudan’s legal community have taken cases to the EACJ in the past. The capacity of the EACJ is limited, however, as it only hears about 40 cases per year. Moreover, cases must be filed in Arusha, Tanzania. Plans for opening an office in Juba are ongoing.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The 2011 Insolvency Act provides for both personal and corporate bankruptcies. Given the lack of commercial courts, there is little information available about the rights of creditors in practice. South Sudan is tied for last place in the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report ranking for “resolving insolvency.”

Real Property

The World Bank-funded South Sudan Country Report Findings of the Land Governance Assessment Framework assessed South Sudan’s underdeveloped legal and institutional framework reflects the difficulties that the country has faced in establishing effective governance and rule of law institutions after decades of conflict. Although significant legislative reforms have been made since the end of the war in 2005—including the passing of the 2009 Land Act and the 2009 Local Government Act—the laws remain largely unimplemented. Most land governance institutions operate according to procedures developed in the colonial era, and there is a wide divergence between law and practice. Bridging this gap has been one of the most difficult challenges of the postwar period. Institutional arrangements are also undermined by poor coordination among formal institutions at each level of government (horizontal overlap), between the three levels of government (vertical overlap) and between the formal and customary systems. While dated, this report is presumed to largely remain accurate and given the fighting since, perhaps understates the complexity of problem. (See the full report here: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/756521504872888898/text/119635-WP-P095390-PUBLIC-7-9-2017-10-34-1-SouthSudanCountryReport.txt ).

Ownership of land is often unclear, with communities and government often claiming the same property. In some cases, multiple individuals hold registration certificates demonstrating sole ownership of the same piece of land. There was no progress in 2019 towards comprehensive land reform. Laws on mortgages, valuation, and the registration of titles have not been drafted. While the 2009 Land Act and the 2009 Investment Promotion Act both state that non-citizens can lease land for investment purposes; foreign ownership is prohibited and clear regulations governing how a business could access land for investment use were not available.

Currently, some businesses lease land from the government, while others lease land directly from local communities and/or individuals. Under the Land Act, investment in land acquired from local communities must contribute economically and socially to the development of the local community. Businesses will often sign a memorandum of understanding with the local communities in which they agree to employ locals or invest in social services in exchange for use of the land. Land negotiations with communities often require several months or longer to complete. South Sudan ranked 177 out of 185 countries for ease of registering property in the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report.

As of March 2020, 3.91 million South Sudanese were internally or internationally (refugees) displaced from their homes due to conflict. During the five-year civil war, many of their houses were illegally occupied and likely remain so. Property owners or public authorities may file for an order to evict unauthorized occupants under the Land Act. While the rightful owners may hold clear land titles, it is unclear if the legal system is equipped to handle their claims and it is likely that land ownership will be regularly disputed throughout large parts of the country in the foreseeable future.

Intellectual Property Rights

The legal structure for intellectual property rights (IPR) is weak, and enforcement is lax. Recorded instances of intellectual property theft are rare. While the Investment Act of 2009 includes an article on the protection of IPR, implementing legislation on trademarks, copyrights, and patents has not yet been passed. To date, the only intellectual property law which has been put forward to the legislature is the Trademarks Bill of 2013. No new IP-related laws or regulations were enacted in 2019.

South Sudan does not track or seize counterfeit goods. There has been no known prosecution of IPR violations, and there are no estimates available for traffic of counterfeit goods. There was one report of an unauthorized public screening of a U.S. film in 2018.

South Sudan is not a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Sudan 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/ .