Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2025Policy Paper
In this article, we critically examine how existing international arbitration and specifically investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) may be misaligned with African values and legal culture and proposes the African concept of Ubuntu as a philosophical and procedural foundation to reform norms of arbitration. Using benchmark cases such as Biwater Gauff v. Tanzania, Von Pezold v. Zimbabwe, Glamis Gold v. USA, Bear Creek Mining v. Peru, Urbaser v. Argentina, and Cortec Mining v. Kenya, we show how mainstream arbitration has disempowered community stakeholders and ignored community interests. We then delineate Ubuntu, the African philosophy of relational personhood which incorporates respect for individual dignity, communality and harmony, and make a case for its incorporation into arbitration as a foundational concept in line with "fundamental notions of justice and equity". Procedural innovations are proposed that embrace community and non-disputing party participation, fostering transparency, and streamlining procedures to align with the values within Ubuntu. We highlight the wider consequences of an "Ubuntu-inspired" approach on sustainability, human rights, and development outcomes, drawing on contemporary legal instruments and the new AAA Model BIT. Our conclusion offers concrete policy recommendations including the insertion of Ubuntu into African and Afrocentric global treaty documents, the impact of indigenous participation and socio-environmental issues in ISDS, and the integration of African legal values into the international rules of arbitral practice where there is direct effect upon the nations of the African Continent.
