Posts by Zuwa Matondo
The Killing of Gadaffi: the death of a tyrant or the death of a chance at justice?
Gadaffi is dead. Libya’s chief forensic pathologist confirmed in an autopsy that Gaddafi was killed by a single shot to the head. A previous Legal Frontiers entry explored the question of whether Muammar Gadaffi was a legitimate military target. NATO forces acted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, some argue using force under the guise of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and UN Security Council Resolution 2009. As it turns out, NATO troops were not the ultimate armed force to capture and subsequently kill Gadaffi, but the rebel movement, with essential lethal backing from NATO.
Libya’s non-elected interim leaders of the National Transitional Council (NTC) have since officially declared the country’s ‘liberation’ following the death of Muammar Gaddafi and called for reconciliation after more than four decades under the autocratic leader. However, the issue that has emerged since Gadaffi’s death has been whether this ‘liberation’ was achieved in a just manner. This speaks to the ability of the new NTC government to have adhered to the standard of the rule of law. Furthermore, this is especially pertinent in the volatile post-conflict transitional period Libya is currently in where the NTC will now also have to deal with many Gadaffi loyalists.
Several African leaders, such as President Jacob Zuma of South Africa, have voiced their concerns that Gaddafi should “
Libya: Is Gaddafi a Legitimate military target?
The current escalating crisis in Libya has raised several international legal issues, namely the imposition of sanctions and most recently the implementation of the United Nations-mandated ‘no-fly zone’ over Libyan territory. However, a further legal question has arisen over the last couple of days. On Monday morning, the epicentre of Muammar Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli lay in ruins as coalition forces continued their mission to weaken the Libyan leader’s military strength. This has given rise to what is probably the most controversial legal issue of the crisis: is Colonel Gaddafi a legitimate military target in the implementation of the no-fly zone? This debate circulates around the interpretation of the U.N. Security Council’s Resolution 1973 (UNSCR 1973) passed on March 17, 2011.
Firstly, enforcement action can be authorised by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter to maintain or restore international peace and security. This is an exception to the prohibition of the threat or use of force in article 2(4) of the charter. The main issue surrounding the Security Council’s resolution is the scope of force and legitimate targets allied forces can use in protecting civilians and enforcing the no-fly zone.
The UN Security Council Resolution 1973 authorises member states to take “all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country … while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any…
African Countries and the WTO Dispute Settlement System: strangers in an alien land?
In 1995, the World Trade Organization (WTO) came into existence, introducing some key reforms to the long-standing General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) system. The most important reform was the setup of the Dispute Settlement System (DSS). There was now a greater clarity of rules and regulations, binding decisions and an Appellant Body. One would imagine that the highly juridical and legalized system based on equality and strict rules would be somewhat advantageous to African countries (the largest group in the WTO). This has not been the case. In fact, African countries’ involvement in the WTO dispute settlement system in the first decade has been minimal at best. In the first decade (1995-2005) of the DSS, no African country was ever a complainant in a dispute and in only six cases was an African country a respondent. In addition, Egypt is the only African country to have shown initiative and request the establishment of a panel, in the Egypt-Definitive Anti-dumping Measures on Steel Rebar from Turkey case. The one comparatively active area for African states in the DSS is their participation in disputes as third parties. Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Senegal, Cameroon and Cote-d’Ivoire have all participated in this capacity.
The most common reasons propagated for this trend include the low volume of global trade emanating from and to Africa, African countries’ inability to navigate the complicated and expensive DSS, and a lack of expert…
China in Africa: Can Africa’s legal institutions cope?
The classic story is that there was once a large, poor, but resource-rich country emerging from a period of conflict, whose government decided to focus on development and modernization. They began a dialogue with a rich Asian country which had already become a major importer of their oil. This rich Asian country proposed a bargain with the poor nation: in exchange for its natural resources it would receive a line of credit and the ability to import technology, and have companies from the rich nation build infrastructure. Readers may or may not be aware that the poor country with oil is actually China and the rich country is Japan. It is also very much the mutually beneficial dynamic that has come to characterize China’s engagement with many African countries. However, serious questions have been raised regarding China’s role in Africa, and in particular whether African countries have strong enough legal and regulatory institutions to deal with the increased Sino-investment.
Economists project that China will soon become Africa’s largest trading partner with trade figures set to hit a record high of more than $100 billion in 2010. The International Monetary Fund recently predicted that growth for Sub-Saharan Africa, which typically includes 47 countries (excluding North Africa), should reach 5% this year, up from an earlier prediction of 4.5%.[1] In 2011, it said, growth could rise to 5.5%.[2] Increased trade…
