Bibliographie sélective OHADA

It may be assumed that all of the United States’ trading partners were impacted by the recent “Liberation Day” announcement – an announcement which constitutes “two distinct tariff actions” – as will be highlighted in this paper. However, despite previous concerns of being targeted by their free trade agreement (FTA) partner, Canada and Mexico – as would have been or should be expected, have been exempted from the tariff imposition. As well as addressing factors which have contributed to the shift from free trade to increasingly and predominantly protectionist stances and most likely, fair trade practices, this paper is aimed at highlighting and explaining the rationales behind the recent historical developments – as well as highlighting those factors that have triggered the build up to the Liberation Day Announcement of the 2nd April 2025. It is remarked that “Trump’s reciprocal tariff doctrine, holds foreign countries accountable”. Against this backdrop of discontent with World Trade Organisation’s dispute resolution mechanisms, which will be further elaborated on, in the paper, the immediate and possible long term impacts of the Announcement, will be considered. As well as exploring the reasons for recent developments – by way of reference to historical developments and data, the paper also considers the underlying frameworks governing the calculations of recent tariff rates and hikes. Whilst there are arguments regarding the validity of such calculations, or whether the current scenario justifies the basis for implementing “national emergency measures”, what can be regarded as an emergency response can be determined through a consideration of underlying and contributory factors. If negotiations, and more specifically, bilateral negotiations, take place as hoped, between those countries impacted by the Liberation Day Announcement, financial stability across global markets is expected to be restored. However, if retaliatory measures follow – with an escalation of trade wars, possible repercussions should be cause for concern. The global trading system is still recovering from the recent crisis which was largely uncontrollable – hence, it is more likely (and hoped) that the recent market turbulence and volatilities will be short term.

Will the April 2nd Announcement generate its intended objectives? It’s still early days – however, it appears increasingly likely that negotiation outcomes – particularly between those significantly impacted by the Announcement, will be a major determinant in deciding whether the tariff hikes resulting from the April 2nd Announcement, will be short or long term. As of the 11th April, 2025, President Trump’s universal tariffs on China had amounted to 145% whilst China announced tariffs of 125% on U.S imports. Amongst other things, this paper aims to address complexities and challenges faced by regulators in identifying and assessing risk, problems arising from different perceptions of risk, and solutions aimed at countering problems of risk regulation. It will approach these issues through an assessment of explanations put forward to justify the growing importance of risks, well known risk theories such as cultural theory, risk society theory and governmentality theory. In addressing the problems posed as a result of the difficulty in quantifying risks, it will consider a means whereby risks can be quantified reasonably without the consequential effects which result from the dual nature of risk that is, risks emanating from the management of institutional risks.