Al-Khabar Lebanese News
Related Articles
Prof Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu,
There is a sufficient literature review of findings, and undisputable facts that any economy striving to shift from a consumption base to a productive cum industrial base requires a deeply structured capital market as a backup and that in its essence constitute the theory of financial capitalization of an economy.
With such a shift process, the market naturally, but gradually transformed into three observed phenomenon compositions for internal structural interactions, which are;
- The Investment Community
- The Business Community
- The Earning Community
The interaction of these communities listed above as in ‘intra-engagement’ as well as ‘extra-engagement’ among themselves within the market system demands an enforceable contract relationship to avoid potential exploitation, manipulations and possible conflicts as a result of abuse of market rules by unscrupulous persons. For any given time, the ‘Investment Class’ engages with the ‘Business Class’ of productive ideas, there is an expectation that the ‘Business Class’ will honour the promises of investment made, and it pay back, which requires an enforceable binding contract, the essence and necessity of the Court of Law for such execution, to avoid likely or anticipated unfair play. Which further serve as the antecedent in the promotion of the Court system, and the legal architecture of a National Economy towards industrial friendly ecosystem to stimulate a shift from consumption base to productive base economy.
Though the well-known traditional court system in practice does play a cardinal role in a modern democratic dispensation and constitutional governance, its procedures and litigation rules in a class suit and administration of justices have not been that friendly to the ecosystem of business growth and industrial productive complexities due to ‘time’ and ‘cost’ factors in dispute settlement. This gave rise to the essence and emergence of alternative dispute resolution for the Earning (Consumer), Business and Investment community, and began gaining traction in its new form as quasi-Judicial Arbitration proceedings in the early 1920s in America, though historically the formalization and application of the arbitration approach in resolving dispute in United of America is arguable traced to the year 1786 in the Chamber of Commerce of New York in resolving discord and settlement.
Hence, the theory governing Alternative Dispute Resolution with emphasis on Arbitration was seen as liberal and advantageous to ‘claimants’ and ‘respondents’ towards resolving certain kinds of civil cases, and in many circumstances, the choice of the Presiding Arbitrator is the consensus decision of the ‘Claimants’ and ‘Respondents’ to preside over the dispute for settlement unlike the traditional court system based on its own strict rules, independent of the services-benefactors.
As the years passed by, the ADR-Arbitration approach in resolving discord, adjustment of differences and settlement of disputes became desiring machinery of Business and the industrial community than the Class suit proceedings of the Traditional Court system. Furthermore, while the legal enforceability of the traditional court verdicts is limited to Jurisdiction, ADR-Arbitration as a quasi-Judicial process turns to uphold extra-territorial approval or some kind of universal binding of verdict due to its nature of ‘claimants’ and ‘respondents’ deep involvement in the entire process of regulative rules leading to the final verdicts of the ‘Presiding Arbitrator’. In a circumstance where a verdict suffers refutation beyond a reasonable doubt or being challenged by the ‘claimants’ or ‘respondents’, then an appeal process may be required as a formal legal intrusion, paving the way to the Appellate Court.
The author thereby concludes, qualified and committed economic managers of any given fragile economy, with aspiration to shift from a consumption-based narration to an industrial base power house, thus improving its financial market from shallow to deep capital base could be determined from how the government goes about the promulgation of its ‘Arbitration Law’ in terms of the architecture of the legal framework in favour of dispute settlement of the Investment and the Business community. On this very basis, the author argues that Sierra Leone (Arbitration Act, 2022) could be seen in the light of such a scenario, by finding itself, if not first, will be among the best three legislative instruments within the ECOWAS region to guide the ‘Arbitration Court’ proceedings of the Country. Which is a positive effort and commitment of the government.
REFERENCE
- Emerson D. F. (1970), History of Arbitration Practices and Law. Cleveland State Law Review. Vol. 19 (1) p.155-160
- Senzu, T. E. (2023a), The theory of Economic Capitalization and Organic Laws. Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4344444
- Senzu, T. E. (2023b), Empirical Objectivity in the Determination of Market Progressive Retrieve from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4374974
——————————————————-
Bro. Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, is a Professor of Law and Economics, serving as the President of Frederic Bastiat Institute Africa, Center of Law, Economics and Finance, which is a liberal affiliate of Mercatus Center, George Mason University, USA. And a Fellow of the Faculty of Law, Fourah Bay College, University of Sierra Leone. As well as a distinguished Research Fellow of the West Africa Monetary Institute.
