Between December 2017 and February 2018, SOAS University of London and the firm of Broderick Bozimo & Company (BBaC) invited responses to the maiden Arbitration in Africa Survey.  The survey focuses exclusively on Africa and African practitioners.  Respondents were asked to share their experience, practice and thoughts on arbitration and the extent of their participation in international and domestic arbitration.  More importantly, the data provides some explanation for the imbalanced representation of African arbitrators and counsel in the international arena.

The key findings from the survey are as follows:

A significant majority of the respondents have a legal background

• 90.6% of respondents are lawyers and 73.3% of respondents work in a law firm.

• 83.8% of respondents describe themselves as arbitration practitioners.

• Respondents act in the capacity of counsel, arbitrator, registrar / tribunal secretary, academic, consultant, and legal adviser.

African Practitioners are underrepresented in arbitration

• During the reporting period (2012 – 2017), 82.2% of respondents did not sit as arbitrator in international arbitration; and 58% did not sit as arbitrator in domestic arbitration.  Diversity issues are, therefore, on the agenda in domestic arbitration.

• Over the same period, 59.2% of respondents did not act as counsel in international arbitration; and 40.3% of respondents did not act as counsel in domestic arbitration.

Experience in domestic arbitration clearly outweighs experience in international arbitration

• 41.1% of respondents sat as arbitrator in at least one domestic dispute over the reporting period.  During the same period, 17.8% of respondents sat as arbitrator in at least one international arbitration.

• Over the same period, 64.4% of respondents acted as counsel in at least one domestic arbitration; and 40.8% acted as counsel (or co-counsel) in at least one international arbitration.

• 22.5% of respondents acted as tribunal secretary in domestic arbitration; and 7.9% acted as tribunal secretary in international arbitration disputes.

A significant majority of the respondents are formally trained in Arbitration

• 81.7% of respondents have formal training in arbitration law and practice.  72% of these were trained by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK).

Domestic Arbitration is growing in Africa

• 85.3% of respondents believe that domestic arbitration is growing in their jurisdiction. 8% did not think domestic arbitration is growing in their jurisdiction.

Effectiveness of national arbitration laws

• 61% of respondents believe their national arbitration law is effective. 37% believe their national arbitration law needs review. 13% believe their national arbitration law is ineffective.

Effectiveness of Judicial support of arbitration

• 64% of respondents rated the judiciary in their jurisdiction is effective. 34% rated their judiciary as average. 14% rated their judiciary as poor.

Participation in international arbitration

• For 74.3% of the respondents, African arbitration practitioners do not adequately participate in international arbitration.

• Poor perception of African arbitrators by arbitration users and the failure of Africans to appoint African arbitrators and counsel are the top reasons for the lack of participation of African arbitration practitioners in international arbitration.

The full report can be accessed here.

Isaiah Bozimo is a Partner in Broderick Bozimo & Company.