Bibliographie sélective OHADA

This thesis, exploring the rule of law for international rules, offers a human bond of common good between determinacy of substance and legitimacy of structure of rules in order to evaluate international obligations of States in international law on foreign investment. In an in-depth exposition of the theoretical underpinnings and practices underlying the normative structure of rules in international law, the thesis critically questions the legal reasoning embedded in—and the authority of rules borrowed from—principles and precedents or moral and political evaluations by arbitrators in interpretation of States' contractual, customary, and treaty obligations in investment arbitrations. With crucial moral, political, social and economic ramifications for the constitutional functions of States and concomitant interests of their human members implicated in the concept of expropriation in international law, the thesis provides a framework of legitimacy in a common good approach with structural criteria of recognition and coherence for the interpretation of States' obligations in investment arbitration. Coherence brings to the fore conflicting demands of justice requiring fresh evaluation divesting a general rule of its authoritative force, and recognition brings to the fore the validation of the power to engage in moral and political evaluation. Together, these structural criteria offer a common good approach of legitimacy to test the authority of States' obligations and the power of arbitrators in hard cases. By virtue of these criteria, the thesis characterizes the nature of substantive property rights of corporations and corresponding obligations of States in foreign investment as contingent and consensual in contrast with the absolute and constitutional rights of human beings in human rights. Through coherence and recognition, the thesis also portrays a supreme status for customary international law for the normative structure and substance of States' contractual or treaty obligations in the interpretation of hard cases in international law on foreign investment. The thesis espouses a new horizon for legal reasoning in foreign investment arbitration that eschews the lex lata veneer for lex ferenda propositions manufactured from precedents and principles, on the one hand, and the sheen of law for the conception of justice of investor-State arbitrators, on the other, in cases of hard confrontation between the demands of justice.

Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) have proliferated at an unprecedented pace since the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Although the WTO legally recognizes countries’ entitlement to form RTAs, neither the WTO nor parties to RTAs have an unequivocal understanding of the relationship between the WTO and RTAs. In other words, the legal controversies, the result of uncertainty regarding the application of the WTO/GATT laws, risk undermining the objectives of the multilateral trade system. This thesis tackles a phenomenon that is widely believed to be heavily economic and political. The thesis highlights the economic and political aspects of regionalism, but largely concentrates on the legal dimension of regionalism. The main argument of the thesis is that the first step to achieving harmony between multilateralism and regionalism is the identification of the legal uncertainties that regionalism produces when countries form RTAs without taking into account the substantive and procedural aspect of the applicable WTO/ GATT laws. The thesis calls for the creation of a legal instrument (i.e. agreement on RTAs) that combines all of the applicable law on RTAs, and simultaneously clarifies the legal language used therein. Likewise, the WTO should have a proactive role, not merely as a coordinator of RTAs, but as a watchdog for the multilateral system that has the power to prosecute violating RTAs. The author is aware that political concerns are top priorities for governments and policy makers when dealing with the regionalism problematic. Hence, legal solutions or proposals are not sufficient to create a better international trade system without the good will of the WTO Members who are, in fact, the players who are striving to craft more regional trade arrangements.