Abstract
At the beginning of 2011, Egypt witnessed radical political developments that led to the emergence of a pressing tendency to adjudicate the collapsed regime’s policies and practices. Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian State Council issued a number of judicial decisions that confirmed that the sale of the privatized governmental enterprises had been tainted by corruption. Crucially, the Court maintained that flagrant breach of law, regulations, and administrative orders that encompassed these transactions created serious suspicions about corruption committed by public officials and investors. It concluded that the existence of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, had deprived foreign investors of the opportunity to resort to international arbitration. Beyond that, it affirmed that its decisions aimed at protecting the state’s wealth and economy, and encouraging serious investments. However, when Egypt, upon nearly identical circumstantial evidence invoked the issue of corruption as a public policy consideration before ICSID arbitration, it was discarded due to lack of evidence. This paper compares the position of both the national court and the international arbitral tribunal when allegations of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, are raised. The study believes that the Court reversed fundamental legal principles of the national law, and maneuvered the concept of transnational public policy to produce a plausible, yet not sound conclusion in the realm of both the national judicial system and international arbitration. Further, this paper suggests that the court’s attempt to safeguarding the Country’s public wealth actually jeopardized justice, the state’s economy, and its investment credibility.
School
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy
Department
Law Department
Degree Name
LLM in International and Comparative Law
Graduation Date
Winter 1-31-2022
Submission Date
1-24-2022
First Advisor
Thomas Skouteris
Committee Member 1
Hani Sayed
Committee Member 2
Jason Beckett
Extent
97 leaves
Document Type
Master's Thesis
Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval
Not necessary for this item
Recommended Citation
APA Citation
Badr Eldin, A.
(2022).Omar Effendi vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption as a Transnational Public Policy Consideration [Master's Thesis, the American University in Cairo]. AUC Knowledge Fountain.
https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/1872
MLA Citation
Badr Eldin, Ahmed. Omar Effendi vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption as a Transnational Public Policy Consideration. 2022. American University in Cairo, Master's Thesis. AUC Knowledge Fountain.
https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/1872
Included in
Civil Law Commons, Civil Procedure Commons, Contracts Commons, Courts Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, Evidence Commons, Government Contracts Commons, Judges Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Litigation Commons, Rule of Law Commons