The recently released ICSID Caseload Statistics and the prevailing investment dispute climate highlight important investment arbitration developments for Nigeria and the wider Sub-Saharan region.
First, within the period under review, Sub-Saharan African states saw rising investment dispute claims. In fact, the number of ICSID cases surged by 100%, and the reasons for the huge increase are nuanced.
Second, the ICSID framework remains a veritable tool for foreign investors to hedge their exposure against states, including Sub-Saharan African states.
Third, Sub-Saharan African arbitrators remain underrepresented on ICSID tribunals. Even so, more of them were appointed than in previous years.
This note examines those developments and what they mean for Sub-Saharan states, for the foreign investors doing business in the region, and for the investment arbitration community at large.
A sharp rise in investment arbitration claims
The ICSID Caseload Statistics for the first half of 2025 record 67 new cases. Sub-Saharan African states faced 16 of them. That is the highest figure for any region in the period. Moreover, it is more than twice the number of cases brought against the region in the previous two years combined.
The causes are mixed. The return of military rule in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso coincides with the rise. Even so, claims against those three states make up only 30% of the increase. Senegal, Comoros, Rwanda and Togo account for a further 20%. Recent threats add to the picture. A UK-based mining company has threatened a treaty claim against Nigeria over cancelled lithium leases, and a Spanish company is reported to be suing Equatorial Guinea over a mining claim.
Sector exposure matters too. Oil, gas and mining drive 43% of new ICSID cases. Those sectors mirror the economies of many Sub-Saharan states. Consequently, regulatory change in them raises dispute risk directly.
Why the ICSID framework still favours investors
Foreign investors continue to rely on ICSID. Tribunals upheld claims in full or in part in 57% of the cases concluded in the first half of 2025. That share rose from 55% and 45% in the two preceding years. Better access to specialist counsel is one likely reason.
Representation on tribunals tells a different story. Arbitrators from Sub-Saharan Africa received only 5% of appointments, even though 24% of new cases arose from the region. By contrast, that 5% is still an improvement on 2% in 2023 and 4% in 2024.
What states and investors should do
The trend gives Sub-Saharan states a clear task. They should review their investment treaties, recent policy changes and live disputes, then close the gaps that expose them to claims. Investors, for their part, should map treaty protection early and structure investments with the dispute route in mind. Our Arbitration: 2025 Wrap-Up and 2026 Outlook covers the wider market, and our note on how the Supreme Court affirmed arbitral awards against an illegality challenge shows how Nigerian courts now treat enforcement.
Click the button below to read our full analysis of the 2025 ICSID caseload and its implications for investment arbitration across Sub-Saharan Africa.
