Building on the institutional-strengthening themes from Day 2, Day 3’s discussions reflected a growing confidence in Africa’s ability to shape its own dispute resolution architecture, investment environment and development agenda. Africa’s future in international dispute resolution and resource development will depend not simply on established legal frameworks, but on the credibility, enforceability and practical implementation of those frameworks in ways that attract sustainable investment while protecting local interests.
Legal certainty and credible enforcement remain central to investment confidence
In a discussion on critical minerals, ESG, investment protection and institutional cooperation, panellists repeatedly emphasised that capital flows toward jurisdictions offering predictability, credible enforcement and trusted institutions. The cost of capital was directly linked to regulatory certainty, with speakers noting that investors are more likely to commit capital where there are clear and enforceable protections.
Judge Unterhalter emphasised the establishment of dispute resolution mechanisms that are genuinely workable and enforceable in practice, rather than ‘beautiful pieces of paper’. Panellists stressed that effective dispute resolution cannot exist in isolation from broader institutional credibility, anti-corruption safeguards and regulatory consistency.
Responsible investment and community participation are becoming commercial imperatives
Panellists noted that ESG considerations are increasingly evolving beyond mere technical compliance obligations toward genuine community engagement, co-designed projects and accessible grievance mechanisms capable of resolving disputes at local level before they escalate.
Panellists cautioned that the absence of a meaningful ‘social licence’ continues to undermine projects, delay development and erode investor confidence. Grievance mechanisms must be practical, responsive and trusted by communities. Arbitration and other ADR mechanisms were highlighted as valuable tools for resolving resource-related disputes in ways that preserve relationships, respect human rights and support long-term project sustainability.
Africa is increasingly positioning itself from a place of strategic leverage rather than dependency
Africa’s strength lies not only in individual mineral resources, but in the continent’s combined mineral plurality and strategic importance to global supply chains and the energy transition. Rather than attracting investment for its own sake, investment should contribute meaningfully to infrastructure, industrialisation and long-term value retention within the continent. Panellists suggested that Africa should leverage the world’s continued dependence on its resources to negotiate for responsible and sustainable investment outcomes.
Institutional cooperation is strengthening the legitimacy and accessibility of African arbitration
AFSA’s strategic partnerships with AUDA-NEPAD, the Africa Minerals Development Centre and the University of Cape Town reflect increasing collaboration between arbitral institutions, development agencies and academic institutions across the continent. The expansion of the SADC AFSA Alliance and the introduction of AFSA’s rules translated into French, Portuguese and Swahili were highlighted as important steps toward greater accessibility, inclusivity and regional integration in African arbitration. Panellists stressed that collaboration amng institutions enhances consistency, credibility and international confidence in African arbitration, but cautioned that MOUs require practical implementation and accountability to avoid becoming purely symbolic instruments.
Transformation, diversity and credibility remain central to the future of arbitration in Africa
Panellists noted encouraging progress in the appointment of African arbitrators in commercial disputes, while recognising that significant work remains, particularly in investment arbitration and the appointment of female arbitrators. Institutions are increasingly adopting transparent appointment processes and diversity-focused initiatives, however, responsibility for transformation ultimately rests with the broader legal community, parties and counsel.
Flexibility and enforceability continue to shape debates around the future of ADR
The Young AFSA debate reflected the tension between mediation’s flexibility and relationship-preserving qualities, and arbitration’s neutrality, procedural discipline and enforceability. The debate underscored a broader theme running throughout the JAW conference: modern dispute resolution increasingly requires flexibility, pragmatism and mechanisms capable of responding to shifting commercial and political realities.
From discussion to implementation
The final session challenged attendees not merely to continue debating the issues raised across the various panel discussions, but to actively advance the practical reforms, institutional cooperation and responsible investment practices discussed.
