“In the Democratic Republic of Congo as elsewhere in Africa, the question is not about choosing between national sovereignty and economic attractiveness, but about defining the conditions for their coexistence, according to the author. The recent statements by President Félix Tshisekedi on mining taxation illustrate this central tension. A strong state is not one that discourages investment, he says, but one that imposes stable, predictable rules that are respected by all.”
By Gregory P. Tosi
Recent developments in Kinshasa highlight one of the most complex governance challenges in contemporary Africa. On July 13, 2026, President Félix Tshisekedi instructed state collection services to avoid excessive coercive measures against mining companies, so that unpredictable tax actions do not weaken investor confidence. At the same time, the head of state reaffirmed that the Democratic Republic of Congo must increase public revenues derived from its vast mineral wealth. This is not a contradiction. It is the balance that every resource-rich country must strive to maintain.
This balance has its roots in a long history. During the colonial era, charter companies often viewed African laws and institutions not as expressions of sovereign authority, but as obstacles to commercial exploitation. In many territories, these companies wielded quasi-governmental powers to maximize returns for distant shareholders. While independence ended colonial domination, it did not completely erase the idea, among some foreign companies, that the laws of former colonies – now sovereign states – could be negotiated, circumvented, or ignored.
Fortunately, the vast majority of multinational companies operating in Africa today are responsible actors. They invest billions of dollars, create jobs, transfer technologies, and significantly contribute to state tax revenues. Nevertheless, history is marked by episodes in which some companies viewed African legal systems as mere administrative constraints rather than imperative rules requiring full compliance.
The Democratic Republic of Congo has faced this dilemma several times. The controversies surrounding Anvil Mining in 2004, and then First Quantum Minerals a few years later, differed in their facts but led to the same conclusion: when disputes arise between a sovereign state and a multinational corporation, they go beyond a simple commercial dispute. They become tests of national sovereignty, economic actors’ responsibility, and the state’s ability to exert authority over its strategic resources.
Today, disputes over taxation, transfer pricing, customs declarations, environmental obligations, mining royalties, or commitments to local communities continue to emerge in the African mining sector. Companies frequently challenge the accusations against them, and governments do not always prevail. However, these recurring disputes demonstrate that sovereignty and economic returns remain at the heart of the continent’s natural resources development.
This is precisely why President Tshisekedi’s recent directive deserves special attention. His administration rejects two equally dangerous extremes. The first is to consider that multinationals should be able to operate without legal oversight solely because they bring investments and create jobs. The second is to resort to arbitrary enforcement measures that may increase public revenues in the short term but inevitably create uncertainty and deter essential investments for developing these same resources.
Neither of these approaches serves Africa’s long-term interests.
The goal should be to build a predictable legal environment in which governments consistently apply transparent laws and where investors can rely on a stable and impartial administration. Companies should expect to pay the taxes they are legally obligated to, comply with environmental and social regulations, and respect the authority of the host states. Governments, in turn, should avoid arbitrary seizures, unpredictable tax demands, and enforcement measures motivated by political considerations, which undermine confidence in the rule of law.
Few decision-makers in Washington and other major capitals can locate most African countries on a map, let alone grasp the subtleties of the political and economic trade-offs faced daily by leaders like President Tshisekedi. Citizens will hold governments accountable for allowing national wealth to be exploited to the detriment of the public interest. Conversely, a government perceived as excessively aggressive or abusive in law enforcement risks driving away essential investments for the development of these same resources. The issue is not about choosing between sovereignty and investment, but about preserving both.
Africa’s mineral resources can support exceptional economic transformation, but only if governments and investors adhere to the same principle: sovereign laws are neither optional nor negotiable. They form the foundation for sustainable investments, public trust, and shared prosperity. The rule of law is the first pillar of Africa’s development. For African nations, the true measure of success lies not in the amount of wealth leaving the continent, but in the ability of investments made in compliance with the law to build stronger economies and more robust states.
Gregory P. Tosi is a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and a former legal advisor to the United States Congress. He works to promote private investment and affordable housing in developing countries. He regularly writes on international economic development, infrastructure, and public policies.”
