The International Criminal Court (ICC) suffered two notable setbacks in Africa in 2010: the African Union's (AU) renewed call for members not to cooperate in executing ICC arrest warrants for Sudanese President al-Bashir; and the president's first visits to the territory of ICC states parties since warrants were issued in 2009 and 2010. Factors surrounding these developments suggest they do not represent the predominant view or approach to the court in Africa, where there is considerable backing for the ICC among African government officials and civil society. African ICC states parties and civil society should enhance initiatives to demonstrate the support that exists for the court, and to ensure that attacks on it are understood as limited efforts that emanate more from criticisms of the UN Security Council than of the court. Developments in 2011 reinforce these assessments.

Within the context of the current debate on the institutional transformation of the African Union (AU), this article examines the position of the chairperson of the AU Commission (Commission). The importance of the Commission chairperson cannot be over-emphasized. As the head of the “engine room” of the AU, it is pertinent that s/he is given the requisite powers to oversee the proper functioning of the secretariat, which would in turn propel the progressive development of African integration. This article argues that the current intergovernmental nature of the AU, where real decision making powers are held by member states, curtails the Commission chairperson from playing a meaningful role in the integration process. It highlights certain fundamental factors for ensuring the relevance of the chairperson. These include the institutional transformation of the AU, a review of the eligibility requirements for the Commission chairperson, a broad-based election process and hybridized functions.

For integration to succeed, the intending bloc of nations must begin with integration efforts that are based on gradual, continuous and concrete achievements, to create de facto solidarity among community members. This is the theoretical premise on which this article is based. This perspective is also drawn from the normative framework of both the Constitutive Act of the African Union (AU) and the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community. According to its objectives, the AU aims to form a union government, to be preceded by successful economic integration through regional economic communities (RECs). While there are several RECs in Africa, this article examines those in west and southern Africa, being among the more developed. The article discusses whether the RECs have achieved their objectives to the extent that would warrant discussion of, and efforts towards, the imminent formation of the “United States of Africa”.

The recent law revision exercise and tax reform in Nigeria have unwittingly introduced a measure of confusion into determining the applicable tax statute(s). The problem is so bad that, if the opinion of three different experts were sought on the same issue, it is possible that they would purport to be referring to the same law yet cite different sections of different laws. The thrust of this article is to disentangle the associated issues for the proper guidance of taxpayers and the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). The article posits that the continued use of the Laws of Federation of Nigeria 1990 by FIRS is most inappropriate and illegal, and may open any assessment performed under them to legal challenge. The article advocates for a re-enactment of the Companies Income Tax Act.

The principle of equality of arms is firmly entrenched in the jurisprudence of international tribunals, but hardly at all in domestic systems. This article argues for the principle to be applied in Botswana's adversarial system, as a way of ensuring procedural equality and enhancing fair trials. After examining the normative value of the principle, the article refers to a number of domestic jurisdictions that have applied the principle. It also examines the general acceptability of equality and fairness in Botswana case law. This represents a foundation for applying the principle in Botswana. The principle was developed by the European Court of Human Rights, creating its own concept of fairness in trials, irrespective of the position in domestic systems. Since the principle is of international origin, it is necessary to note that “judicial territoriality” and Botswana's dualist system do not pose obstacles to the application of the principle.

This article gives a general overview of an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism known as “conciliation” and the legal framework relating to its practice in Nigeria. Using the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation as a normative framework, the article critically analyses the proposed reforms to the existing legal framework for conciliation in Nigeria which are contained in the Nigerian Federal Arbitration and Conciliation Draft Bill and exposes some of its deficiencies. It also investigates the effect of the statutes of limitation on conciliation proceedings. The article also suggests that the institutionalization of conciliation will enhance its viability as an ADR mechanism in Nigeria.

The difficulties in effective engagement with the global trade environment, especially given the rules-based system of world trade applicable to member states of the World Trade Organisation, are a constant subject for academic and political discourse, particularly when developing countries are involved. One consideration is however often overlooked: the internal constraints which must be faced in these countries along with their added obligations to comply with modern liberalization processes. This article studies these constraints by identifying the challenges facing one of sub-Saharan Africa's largest economies in constructing a stable legal framework for trade and development, which meets domestic needs and complies with the demands of the global market environment.

This article looks at three legal steps that have been taken in Uganda to abolish the practice of female genital mutilation: (1) a process during the drafting of the constitution that resulted in the enactment of different constitutional provisions that implicitly rendered female genital mutilation unconstitutional; (2) the declaration by the Constitutional Court in the case of Law and Advocacy for Women in Uganda v Attorney General in July 2010 that the practice is unconstitutional; and (3) the enactment in April 2010 of the Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act. This article highlights some of the challenges that are likely to be encountered in enforcing both the Constitutional Court decision and the Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act.