A body of jurisprudence is emerging in Africa's most active regional courts on the independence of national judiciaries. This article reveals that while regional case law relevantly echoes efforts by municipal courts to safeguard themselves, circumstances demonstrate that such case law requires greater contextualization across systems. In this regard, the traditional paradigm of linking independence to executive appointments does not empirically stand the test of the multiplicity of independence factors, executive-free regimes have not proved effective in safeguarding independence, and legal traditions or judicial systems have increasingly become irrelevant to the effectiveness of any independence regime. Factors that transcend the traditional determinants of executive control include the nature and functions of the court involved, and the history and background of the judicial structure of the country or region. Notably, the discussion also reveals the need to strike a critical balance between individual rights to a fair trial and inter-state directive policy towards judicial independence as set out in the African Charter.

Djibouti and Eritrea have been in conflict since June 2008 when their troops fought along the Djibouti–Eritrea border. The conflict revolves around the location of the border and sovereignty over the strategically located Doumeira Islands and adjacent reefs. In 2010 Qatar brokered a mediation agreement and began to implement it, but withdrew in 2017 without notifying Eritrea and without providing reasons to either country. The dispute raises a number of international law issues. This article focuses on the validity and application of three relevant colonial treaties (from 1900, 1901 and 1935) that defined the boundary, one of which (the 1935 Treaty) did not enter into force. Issues relevant to the determination of the borderline and sovereignty over the disputed islands and the unique challenges that may arise are discussed in light of the colonial treaties, relevant International Court of Justice jurisprudence and other international law principles, particularly uti possidetis juris.

Article 32(3) of the Constitution of Uganda (1995) establishes the Equal Opportunities Commission; section 14 of the Equal Opportunities Commission Act provides for the functions of the Commission. These include ensuring that the laws, policies and customs of both public and private entities are not discriminatory and do not marginalize any person or deny him / her equal opportunities. The Commission has handled a few complaints dealing with discrimination, affirmative action, marginalization and impairment of equal opportunities. I rely on the drafting history of the Act, among other sources, to argue, inter alia, that the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination under the Act is exhaustive and that the Commission does not have jurisdiction to deal with complaints alleging discrimination on some grounds. I demonstrate that the Commission has been inconsistent in its definition of discrimination and in dealing with remedies where it has found instances of discrimination, marginalization or denial of opportunities. In some cases, the Commission has blurred the distinction between discrimination and marginalization.

The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol) established a reporting process to monitor compliance. Despite its shortcomings, this process provides an opportunity for states to engage in a frank, constructive and open dialogue with the African Commission on the measures they have adopted to realize women's rights and the challenges they face. The DRC's initial report on implementing the Maputo Protocol provides an opportunity to assess how the country has advanced women's rights. This article notes that the DRC has adopted legislation and policies to comply with some of its obligations under the protocol. However, these have not brought about much transformation in terms of effective enjoyment of rights due to the contested nature of many women's rights and the community's patriarchal mindset. The article argues that states should focus on extra-legal measures that can counteract negative attitudes and beliefs towards women's rights.

This article interrogates the traditional limitations of the concept of bailment at common law. It argues that, although possession is a critical element, in modern commerce, a bailment relationship should be capable of being created without actual physical possession and control, but through constructive possession, which is as effective as physical possession and control. With this adjustment to the interpretation of the element of possession, bailment could then apply to intangible property, such as intellectual property. With the support of evidence from other progressive common law jurisdictions and inroads from the tort of conversion and criminal theft, the article argues that this new bailment jurisprudence is beginning to emerge. It then recommends that, in deserving circumstances, the courts should not hesitate to find that a bailment relationship exists, notwithstanding the absence of physical control and possession, at least pending legislative intervention.

This article examines the infusion of information communication technology (ICT) into Nigeria's new company legislation to promote corporate democracy. While the initiative is laudable, especially in the age of the COVID-19 pandemic, the article argues that the reform is of limited value, as only private companies are empowered to deploy ICT in the conduct of general meetings. By excluding public companies, the article argues, inter alia, that the reform overlooks the role that ICT could play in addressing the assumed passivity of latent, large groups, which typify the shareholders of public companies. In making a case for inclusive reform, the article examines the reforms already undertaken by some countries in the common law jurisdictions, whose templates on the subject may inform the changes Nigeria needs to effect in her law.

Special economic zones (SEZs) can be described as “carved out jurisdictions within the overall jurisdiction of a state in order to introduce different laws and regulations that are usually more trade and investment friendly”. South Africa's SEZs are created under the Special Economic Zones Act 16 of 2014. This article analyses the country's legal framework for SEZs, which legal scholars have thus far only examined from a purely economic perspective. It provides a brief historical overview of industrial development zones, examines the 2014 act and suggests some reforms within the SEZ legislative framework. A comparative analysis is provided by drawing some lessons from BRICS member countries that have a successful record in operationalizing SEZs.

Section 159 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 regulates corporate whistleblowing in companies registered under the act. This article critically evaluates section 159 to ascertain whether it adequately protects and encourages corporate whistleblowers. It compares this section with the whistleblower provisions in the Australian Corporations Act 2001, which have strongly influenced section 159 and which were recently reformed, and argues that in the light of the distressing levels of corporate corruption, the low reporting rates of wrongdoing and the widespread victimization of whistleblowers, there is a pronounced need to protect corporate whistleblowers in South Africa. It contends that section 159 does not go far enough in protecting and encouraging corporate whistleblowers, and calls for numerous important reforms to be urgently made.

Protests play a significant role in the political, economic, social and cultural life of our societies. Protests have repeatedly motivated positive social change. Through protesting, individuals and groups express disagreement, opinions and objections to government actions or inactions. Protests bring attention to errors in governance and demand their rectification. The right to peaceful protest is protected under the international and African regional human rights frameworks, including the Nigerian Constitution. In Nigeria, the Public Order Act is designed to support the appropriate and peaceful conduct of peaceful assemblies (protests), meetings and processions. Yet the Nigerian government does not respect the right to peaceful protest, particularly in the case of protests against the government. This can be seen in recent protests against Nigeria's notorious Special Anti-Robbery Squad. This article examines the context of the application of the right to peaceful protest in Nigeria in view of the recent #EndSARS protests.