Reflections on Nigeria v. Process & Industrial Developments Limited (P&ID)

Following an unprecedented ruling by an English High Court on an application in the Nigeria v Process & Industrial Developments Limited (P&ID) case granting Nigeria an extension in time to bring challenges under sections 67 and 68(2)(g) of the English Arbitration Act 1996 ("the 1996 Act"), this article reflects on the implication of the public policy elements of fraud relied on by Nigeria. The article interrogates the reasoning behind the Court's decision, especially pertaining to the allegations of fraud in the procurement of the underlying contract - a Gas Supply and Processing Agreement ('GSPA'). The article also explores some economic justice themes arising from Nigeria's reliance on fraud as a basis for challenging the arbitration award. Drawing on a recent decision of the Mozambique Constitutional Council over illegally procured sovereign debts, it argues that there are parallels and opportunities for learning, especially as it pertains to the role of civil society organisations (CSOs) in holding public officials accountable and exposing odious deals with corrupt foreign conspirators. The reflection concludes with some thoughts on an ongoing debate that has gained traction due to the Nigeria v P&ID case that adopting a national arbitration policy is a viable option for reducing African countries' dependence on foreign courts and arbitration tribunals as a forum for settling disputes with foreign investors.