EGYPT Law and Practice Contributed by: Inji Fathalla, Salma Nasreldine, Haya El Samra and Ismaël Sedky, Shahid Law Firm
Azerbaijan (signed, but not in force), Bahrain, Belarus, the Belgium–Luxembourg Economic Union, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana (signed, but not in force), Burundi (signed, but not in force), Bulgaria, Cameroon (signed, but not in force), Canada, Central African Republic (signed, but not in force), Chad (signed, but not in force), Chile (signed, but not in force), China, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo (signed, but not in force), Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti (signed, but not in force), Eswatini (signed, but not in force), Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon (signed, but not in force), Georgia (signed, but not in force), Germany, Ghana (signed, but not in force), Greece, Guinea (signed, but not in force), Hun- gary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (signed, but not in force), Italy, Jamaica (signed, but not in force), Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, North Korea, Korea, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, North Macedonia (signed, but not in force), Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mau- ritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique (signed, but not in force), the Netherlands, Niger (signed, but not in force), Nigeria (signed, but not in force), occupied Palestinian territories, Oman, Pakistan (signed, but not in force), Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia (signed, but not in force), Senegal (signed, but not in force), Serbia, Sey- chelles (signed, but not in force), Singapore, Slova- kia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa (signed, but not in force), Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tanzania (signed, but not in force), Thailand, Tunisia,Türkiye, Turkmenistan, Ugan- da (signed, but not in force), Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia (signed, but not in force) and Zimbabwe (signed, but not in force). Egypt’s recent entry into the BRICS would suggest a potential collaboration on investment with Brazil, for instance, by ratifying a BIT for the first time with that state. Egypt could also renew its BIT with India, and bring into force the BITs ratified with South Africa and Iran, all of which are member states of the BRICS (Bra- zil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). Given Egypt’s history of participation in numerous bilateral and multilateral treaties, and above all its cur- rent legal framework, all of this suggests that Egypt maintains and develops an environment conducive to
its entry into such agreements as a strategy to attract and protect foreign investments, as the authors have seen with the BIT with the KSA which entered into force in June 2024. 2.2 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty Egypt has adopted only a couple of model BITs that serve merely as a framework for the negotiation and ratification of a full BIT. It contains only the basic pro- visions typically found in any model, such as defini- tions of “investment” and “investor”. It also sets out provisions on the treatment, promotion, and protec- tion of investments, most-favoured nation provisions, national treatment, fair and equal treatment, as well as expropriation, compensation for losses, transfer of funds, and dispute resolution. The model, however, is meant to be refined and further developed during the negotiation of a specific BIT. By itself, the model is not comprehensive; it must be sup- plemented. For example, the BIT concluded with the KSA includes provisions on the protection of intellec- tual property, confidentiality, environmental and labour matters, corruption and competition. Furthermore, it addresses matters relating to residence and stays, provisions virtually unknown in previous BIT practice, at least with respect to Egypt. Such provisions are absent from earlier models, which, as their name suggests, serve only as a basic template. It is left to the contracting states to adapt, supplement, and implement their particular needs and priorities in the final negotiated BIT. 2.3 Free Trade Agreements Egypt is a member of several free trade agreements, including the Greater Arab Free Trade Agreement (GAFTA), the Common Market for Eastern and South- ern Africa (COMESA), the European Union–Egypt Association Agreement, the Egypt–Turkey Free Trade Agreement, and the Egypt–EFTA Free Trade Agree- ment. These agreements grant protection to investors, such as in the COMESA treaty, which sets out provisions concerning protections from nationalisation, potential political unrest, or unforeseen economic setbacks in the host state. Furthermore, investors are entitled to
52 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook