Skip to main content
Home
  • Newsletter
  • Cart
  • Languages
    • العربية
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Profile
    • Login
    • Sign up
  • Log in / Register
Channels
  • Language
    • العربية
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Home
  • Channels
    • Magazine
    • Photoaward
    • Libya Chronicles
    • zenithTalk
    • Lebanon Chronicles
    The Rise of Aydarous Zubaydi in Yemen
    The Rise of Aydarous Zubaydi in Yemen

    The Southern Comeback in Yemen

    Health and Water Management in Egypt and Sudan
    Health and Water Management in Egypt and Sudan

    Death on the Nile

    Migration out of Tunisia
    Migration out of Tunisia

    Harqa or the Boats of Death

    Protests in Balochistan and Kurdistan regions in Iran
    Protests in Balochistan and Kurdistan regions in Iran

    A New Day for Sunnis in Iran

    Iran Protests and the Crackdown in Balochistan
    Iran Protests and the Crackdown in Balochistan

    The Story of Zahedan’s Shaykh al-Islam

    Twitter, Facebook and censorship in Egypt
    Propaganda and messaging apps in Libya, Egypt and Ethiopia

    Messages in a Bottle

    Explore Channel
    fotopreis2017header2
    zenith Photo Award 2017

    Islam in Europe

    fotopreis2014header.
    zenith Photo Award 2014

    Islam in Germany (2014)

    fotopreis2013header4
    zenith Photo Award 2013

    Muslims in Germany (2013)

    fotopreis2011header2
    zenith Photo Award 2011

    Islam in Germany (2011)

    Explore Channel
    Detention Centers in Libya
    Detention Centers in Libya

    Waiting between cage and gun

    Interview with Raphael Luzon on the fate of Libyan Jews
    Interview with Raphael Luzon on the fate of Libyan Jews

    ‘They think if the Jews come back everything will be ok’

    Scouts Movement in Libya
    Scouts Movement in Libya

    Do a Good Turn Daily

    Bomb squads and the war in Libya
    Bomb squads and the war in Libya

    ‘I won’t stop until the last bomb has been defused’

    An entry from the fifth round of the Libya Uncharted photo award
    Fifth round of the zenith Photo Award Libya Uncharted

    Dust, sweat and sea salt

    Libyans seeking healthcare in Tunisia
    Libyans looking for healthcare in Tunisia

    Care Abroad

    Explore Channel
    zenithTalk Berlin 2
    Building the UAE’s Knowledge Economy

    Building the UAE’s Knowledge Economy

    mona el sayed
    Building Fair Trade Egypt

    Building Fair Trade Egypt

    Amel.jpg
    To Learn from Eachother

    To Learn from Each Other

    Belabbes
    Joining the Debate

    Joining the Debate

    Muhammad.jpg
    Rethinking Education

    Rethinking Education

    Ahmad.jpg
    zenithTalk: Ahmad Al Hidiq

    Tech-Powered Healthcare

    Explore Channel
    Handicraft in and from Lebanon
    Handicraft in and from Lebanon

    Made in Lebanon, again

    Economic Crisis and the Costs of Education in Lebanon
    Economic Crisis and the Costs of Education in Lebanon

    ՙWe Didn’t Want a Temporary Solution՚

    Lebanese Diaspora in France
    Lebanese diaspora in France

    The Port and Paris

    The Future of Karantina
    Beirut after the Blast

    The Future of Karantina

    Why Many Lebanese cannot let go of the Past
    Memory and Politics in Lebanon

    Why Many Lebanese cannot let go of the Past

    Lebanon's Health System in a Critical State
    Hospitals and healthcare in Lebanon

    Lebanon's Health System in a Critical State

    Explore Channel
    All Channels
    • Magazine
    • Photoaward
    • Libya Chronicles
    • zenithTalk
      • Home
      • About
      • Speakers
      • Events
      • Acts
      • Apply
      • Host a talk
    • Lebanon Chronicles
  • Search
Read Time: 6 Minutes
Bookmark this article
An abandoned checkpoint in Libya.
Neither of Libya's governments has state authority, putting assets in limbo. Here, an abandoned desert checkpoint.Photograph: Mirco Keilberth
Doing Business in Failed States

Who Owns Libya’s Oil Assets?

Analysis
by Kilian Bälz
03.09.2016
Business

The collapse of governments has raised questions about state assets and business contracts in the absence of an unchallenged sovereign.

At first glance, Bouhadi versus Breish appears to be a normal dispute between shareholders. Each shareholder group appointed a sympathetic chairman, as the position could only be assigned once. But Hassan Bouhadi and Abdul Majid Breish are not trustees of just any company – they were chairmen of the board of the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA), the sovereign wealth fund founded in 2006 to administer the country’s oil revenue, which manages approximately $70bn in assets.

 

The shareholder groups represent parallel governments of the failing Libyan state. On one side stands the government in Tobruk, which bases its legitimacy on the 2014 parliamentary elections and the support of the international community; on the other side there is the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated government in Tripoli, which claims its authority from the annulment of the election by the Tripoli-based Libyan Supreme Constitutional Court. Both assigned a new chairman to the LIA’s board of directors, with the objective of controlling the fund’s international assets. This confronted the High Court of Justice in London in March, 2016, with a fundamental question: Who owns oil, central bank funds and other assets when a state collapses?

 

The answer given by traditional international law is simple: The government is in possession of state assets, the government being constituted by those who have the power. And the government stays the government until it is effectively replaced by a new one. But the situation in Libya demonstrates the limits of the continuity principle, because neither of the two governments effectively exercises state power. Referring to a status quo doesn’t help the case, either. This would imply an ‘old’ and a ‘new’ order that can clearly be assigned. The court decided to stay the proceedings, hoping that the Government of National Accord, formed in January 2016 and backed by the international community, would get things in order and appoint a new chairman for the LIA. Until then, a trustee appointed by the court will represent the LIA in the British courts.

 

When it comes to failed states, the principles of international law have undergone a significant change. One reason for the court’s restraint may have also been that the Arab Spring disrupted the principles of international laws of territory, people and power. In 2011, large parts of the international community recognised the National Transitional Council of Libya and the Syrian National Coalition as legitimate representatives – long before they had formed a government in the meaning of public international law. Their aim was to compensate a lack of cohesion in government authority while emboldening democratic credentials. This represents a new trend in public international law of not basing decisions merely on the ‘factuality of power’. Politically, it resonates with the will to support democratic change through the early acknowledgement of exile governments or counter-governments, and the need to distinguish between good and bad ‘governments’ in this situation.

 

In August 2011, a London court declared the Libyan transitional government to be legitimate and therefore authorised to gain access to embassy accounts in London. Its justification was that the British government had acknowledged the Libyan transitional government as the legitimate representation of the Libyan people and denied the legitimacy of the Gaddafi government. In an issue as important as the recognition of a government, it was crucial that foreign policy and justice speak with one voice. Here political recognition determined the right to command state assets. Some see this as a brave and consistent step – to deprive a dictator of economic assets that could help preserve his rule, while also empowering legitimate oppositional forces. But critics argue that this violates the principle of non-intervention as stated by international law and endangers transaction security in international economic trade.

Blood diamonds and oil

 

Just how problematic this approach can be in practice is demonstrated by the oil trade. Since 2011, Libyan and Syrian rebels have offered oil for sale from fields under their control, outside of the official distribution channels of the state-owned oil companies. This prompted a series of harsh online announcements and threats by the Libyan National Oil Company (NOC), warning that they would seize the cargo of any ship carrying ‘illegal’ oil – including those abroad. It sounds like a fight over exclusive marketing rights, but what if there is more to it?

 

In principle this case, too, appears to be a simple one: A multinational enterprise may not involve itself in the armed conflicts of a country. It should also honour human rights guidelines, even in conflict situations. It’s a hard-won consensus, codified in policies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s guidelines for multinational enterprises. It prohibits transactions that support a party involved in a civil war. On top of that, the trade of raw materials from conflict regions is both ethically questionable and forbidden by law (and for good reason – witness efforts to clamp down on the trade of ‘blood diamonds’ and the reputational damage to the diamond industry). The conventional doctrine therefore implies that oil transactions with rebels are prohibited.

 

Economic activity in failing states is more than a necessary evil.  The difficulties of this approach are also illustrated by the European Union’s recent approach to trade with Syria. In 2013, Brussels eased the sanctions imposed on Syria to permit oil deals with the approval of the Syrian National Coalition – the leading body opposing President Bashar al-Assad – and thus offer economic support to the “legitimate representatives of the Syrian people”. However, according to prevailing opinion, the Syrian National Coalition hardly constituted a ‘government’ entitled to dispose of the country’s mineral resources. While all rebels are equal according to international law ­regardless of their agenda, foreign policy and economic law function according to different principles. Foreign policy needs to be flexible in responding to change and take sides if necessary, but property rights remain static.

The failed state challenge 

 

When it comes to failed states, the principles of international law have undergone a significant change and are much more open to international intervention than before. This doesn’t obscure the fact that engagements in Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan have not been successes. Still, it would be wrong to blame this solely on the international community – led by the United States – pursuing its own interests. The concept of nation building remains complex, and the Arab Spring certainly raises doubts about whether a democratic transformation of any kind can be promoted from the outside.

 

The question of what role the private sector should play in all this remains largely unexplored, because there are no clear rules of the game. Failing states frequently experience the development of Mafia-like economic structures, and since their market lies particularly in the failure of the state, they have no interest in a genuine development of state and economy. At the same time, it is a mistake to assume that tasks which can’t be handled by the international community are in better hands with private sources. Rebuilding a state depends heavily on the reconstruction of the private sector, and the billions of dollars of development aid invested in Afghanistan and Iraq have not been enough to create effective state instutitions and services, the cornerstone of nation building. Economic activity in failing states is more than a necessary evil. Prohibiting it would mean punishing the population a second time for the failure of its state.


Kilian Bälz is a lawyer who advises international enterprises and organisations active in development cooperation on legal questions arising from state failure in Libya, Syria and Iraq. 

This article first appeared in German in the 3/2016 edition of zenith. Translation by Nova Campanelli.
By: 
Kilian Bälz
Libya
State Assets
International Law
Oil
Whatsapp

Related Articles

Propaganda and messaging apps in Libya, Egypt and Ethiopia
Twitter, Facebook and censorship in Egypt

Messages in a Bottle

by Inga Kristina Trauthig and Alexandra Whitlock
Israeli Policies, Palestinians and Apartheid
Israeli Policies, Palestinians and Apartheid

A Threshold Crossed

by Omar Shakir
Healing after War and Conflict in Libya
Healing after War and Conflict in Libya

How Libyan Women Bring Communities Back Together

by Malek Elmaghrebi
Statelessness in Libya
Statelessness in Libya

Libya's forgotten ones

by Ghady Abdulaziz

  • Home
  • Channels
  • About zenith
  • Reporting Grant
  • Culture
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Innovation
  • Travel
  • Society
  • Vacancies
  • Contact Us

   

Sehr geehrtes Club-Mitglied, wir arbeiten derzeit an einem neuen zenith-Shop. Bis es soweit ist, können Sie ihr Nutzerprofil leider nicht direkt bearbeiten. Bitte senden Sie eine Email an shop@zenith.me und wir nehmen die gewünschte Änderung gerne für Sie vor.

© 2022 CANDID Foundation gGmbH

  • Imprint
  • Netiquette
  • Vacancies
  • Terms and conditions

Developed by UTEEK

Liebe Kundin, lieber Kunde, aus technischen Gründen sind Bestellungen über den zenith-Shop im Moment nicht möglich. Wenn Sie ein Einzelheft auf Rechnung kaufen wollen, etwa die aktuelle Ausgabe, senden Sie bitte eine Email mit Name und Adresse an shop@zenith.me und unser Kundenservice wird sich bei Ihnen melden.

Verstanden