Bilateral investment treaties (BITs) signed prior to the 21st century are problematic. Some
countries with BITs signed during this period have since reviewed those BITs and taken action
to address the disadvantages the BITs held for the host nation or have either resorted to
eradicating some of their BITs. In particular developing countries that signed BITs with
developed nations seem to be disproportionately disadvantaged in these agreements. This
research highlights Kenya's current BIT situation and compares it in light of another
developing country South Africa with regards to its BIT experience. Given that South Africa
has undergone an extensive BIT review process and moves to change some of these BITs this
study compares and contrasts the Kenyan and South African experience. The study highlights the
possible lessons that could be learnt from the South African BIT review experience and provides
recommendations for the Kenyan government regarding its outdated BITs. The lessons and
recommendations benefit not only Kenya but also other countries that are still to review their
BITs as it adds to the literature on why it is important for countries with such BITs to
revisit them and how they can go about the review mechanism best. In addition the study is
also significant as far as it raises awareness of the use and effects of BITs thereby enabling
countries that enter into such agreements to make informed decisions.
