Don’t risk sovereign assets over quick cash

An aerial view of Entebbe International Airport. PHOTO/COURTESY

What you need to know:

The issue: 
Sovereign assets. 

Our view:  
As we try to renegotiate the agreement, an investigation needs to be launched to find out how we got here and who was responsible.
 

In the immediate post-colonial period, Africa was known as a hopeless continent riddled with coup d’etats, corruption and conflict.
With the turn of the new millennium came a dramatic turnaround of narrative, with many touting the phrase ‘Africa rising.’
The continent has witnessed the rise of shiny airports, superhighways, high-rise buildings, among others. And there has always been one noticeable infrastructure partner – China.
The new Chinese engagement with African countries spans close to two decades now and is said to grow at approximately 20 percent annually since 2000.

However, fault lines are beginning to emerge in the relationship between Africa and its highest creditor over sovereign immunity clauses, with some experts warning that Africa is unknowingly walking into a “debt trap”.
The controversial clause is said to be included in most standard Chinese agreements. Reason; to prevent countries from raising sovereign immunity as a defence in case of any legal dispute.
But some conspiracy theorists believe the sovereign immunity clauses are a ploy by the creditor to grab sovereign assets of their choice. And their theory has been supported by the takeover of the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport in 2018 by China after a debt gone-wrong.

Similar fears have been expressed in Kenya, Nigeria, among other countries, over the sovereign immunity clauses. The same fears are being felt in Uganda after this newspaper published a story this week of how government signed an agreement and waived immunity for Entebbe International Airport. 
According to the story, some of the unfavourable provisions in the loan agreement that Uganda signed with the Export-Import (Exim) Bank of China on March 31, 2015, if not amended, expose Uganda’s sovereign assets to attachments and take-over upon arbitration awards in Beijing.

This is cause of concern, especially after we witnessed the takeover of sovereign assets by China in Sri Lanka in 2017 and Zambia the following year. Uganda is desperately trying to renegotiate the agreement, but how did we get here?
Due diligence should have been done by the responsible technocrats to see that the agreement conforms to our Ugandan laws.
As we try to renegotiate the agreement, an investigation needs to be launched to find out how we got here, who was responsible and what we need to do to avert future blunders. 

Continental bodies such as the African Union should also show more interest in promoting a better understanding and coordination of engagement with China.
Otherwise, the narrative of ‘Africa rising’ could very much be dead on arrival with a continent remotely controlled from Beijing.