Over the past decade, the African Union has put in place a normative framework to promote constitutional rule and, in particular, orderly constitutional transfers of power in its member states. Its Peace and Security Council opposes unconstitutional changes of government, including through the use of sanctions. The PSC systematically advocates a return to constitutional order, in particular through free and fair elections, as a remedy for unconstitutional changes of government. However, while opposing unconstitutional means of obtaining or transferring power, the AU has been generally supportive of the use of power-sharing agreements as an instrument of negotiated conflict settlement. Most power-sharing agreements do not accord with the prevailing constitutional order. This dual policy, of opposing certain types of unconstitutional change of government while advocating power-sharing agreements, poses an obvious challenge for the consistency of AU policy.

Kenya's 2010 Constitution has inaugurated into the Kenyan legal framework, among other things, express constitutional recognition of the right to a clean and healthy environment. The constitutionalization of this right and the establishment of liberal provisions for the institution of judicial proceedings in the event of its infraction bear significant implications for public enforcement of environmental rights in Kenya. Hitherto, this was based on the restrictive interpretation of locus standi premised on the principles of common law. This article focuses primarily on public interest environmental litigation in Kenya. It analyses judicial treatment of public interest action for environmental claims in the past and proffers some insights on the prospects for such action under Kenya's new constitutional order. It argues that, with the provision of an explicit and permissive constitutional basis for public interest environmental litigation, it is reasonable to conclude that Kenya is tending towards greater eco-protection.

This article examines the legal and policy responses of the Nigerian government and other agencies to human trafficking, which is one of the central social and economic challenges facing the country today. After exploring the nature and dimensions of the practice, it argues that Nigeria's unenviable position as a country of origin, transit and destination in human trafficking, as well as the impact of the practice on the lives of the victims and adverse implications for the country's corporate image, make it imperative that effective measures are adopted to combat it. In this respect, while accepting that legal measures are important in achieving the objective, the article highlights some deficiencies in current efforts and suggests a multidimensional approach, with greater emphasis on the “push” and “pull” factors of human trafficking prevalent in the country, such as high levels of unemployment, poverty, inequality and marginalization.

This article focuses on the extent of a company's responsibility for the criminal conduct of its employees. It considers the initial reluctance of common law courts to hold corporations criminally responsible for offences requiring mens rea, a mental element not found in artificial persons. The courts overcame this initial difficulty with recourse to the identification doctrine, which seeks to attribute to a company the fault of certain of its officers. However, the restrictiveness and inconsistencies embodied in the various judicial statements of that doctrine precipitated recourse in some jurisdictions to civil law concepts, such as respondeat superior, vicarious liability and even strict liability, to found corporate criminal responsibility. The need to streamline the scope of, if not enhance, corporate criminal liability, has engendered statutory reforms in some jurisdictions. The article considers reforms in Australia, the UK, Canada and the USA, in comparison with the situation in South Africa and Lesotho.

The judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights remains a challenge in many countries. This is generally attributable to the inadequacy of a particular country's legal framework, in particular its constitutional framework. Given the importance of judicial remedies in litigation, in particular public interest litigation, this article considers possibilities for the judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights in Botswana. It discusses the institutional, legal and constitutional framework for the promotion, protection and fulfilment of socio-economic rights in the country. It also tackles the issue of whether the judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights is easily achievable when those rights are not constitutionally entrenched. The article also considers whether the absence of directive principles of state policy within Botswana's Constitution is a hindrance to the judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights in Botswana. Within that context, it highlights the possible means of judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights in Botswana.

In 1988, Nigeria's Federal Military Government promulgated the Arbitration and Conciliation Decree (now the Arbitration and Conciliation Act) to provide a unified legal framework for commercial arbitration throughout Nigeria. At the time of the decree's promulgation, the Federal Military Government had unlimited competence to legislate over any matter in, and for all parts of, Nigeria. However, under Nigeria's current constitutional democracy and federal structure of government, legislative powers are shared between the Federal Government and the respective state governments. This article investigates the constitutionality of the continued application of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act as federal legislation with application in all states of the federation.

The effective resolution of trade disputes related to Sino-African investments will have a major impact on the development of trade and investment between China and African states. Arbitration is considered the best option for the settlement of disputes between China and African states as it offers unique benefits and is both suited to the current environment in African countries and accepted by Chinese and Africans. To make full use of this dispute settlement approach, the Chinese government should take active measures to promote the knowledge of arbitral legal systems in Africa among the Chinese businesses investing or trading locally. Beijing should encourage them to settle disputes with their African counterparts through arbitration. It is also important for Chinese companies to learn about arbitration laws in African states, and choose a favourable arbitral institution and proper arbitration seat.