This Order, issued sua sponte by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, directs the Clerk of the Court to withhold the issuance of the mandate in the appeal between Global Voice Group SA and the Republic of Guinea. Citing Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41(b) and D.C. Circuit Rule 41, the court instructs that the mandate shall not be issued until seven days after the disposition of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. The Order preserves the right of any party to move for an expedited issuance of the mandate upon a showing of good cause.

In Global Voice Group S.A. v. Post and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Guinea (ARPT) and The Republic of Guinea (ICC Case No. 22467/DDA), a three-member ICC arbitral tribunal issued a landmark Final Award addressing critical doctrines of sovereign consent, state entity attribution, and the rigorous evidentiary standards required to sustain allegations of corruption in international commercial and state-entity arbitration. The dispute arose from a 2009 Telecom Partnership Agreement designed to modernize Guinea's telecommunications monitoring infrastructure. The Claimant, Global Voice Group (GVG), alleged that ARPT and the Republic of Guinea unlawfully terminated the contract and withheld significant contractually mandated fees.

Jurisdictional Objections: Sovereign Consent and State Entity Attribution
The Defendants raised threshold jurisdictional objections, asserting that the Republic of Guinea was not bound ratione personae because it signed purely as a supervisory authority, and challenging jurisdiction ratione materiae based on mandatory provisions of the Guinean Public Procurement Code (CMP), which allegedly required ad hoc rather than institutional ICC arbitration.

The Tribunal dismissed both jurisdictional exceptions. Applying principles of international arbitration and domestic law, the Tribunal determined that the State's active participation in the negotiation, implementation, and financial benefits of the agreement—which yielded over $212 million in gross revenue—demonstrated clear, functional intent to be bound by the contract and its arbitration clause. Regarding the procurement code, the Tribunal found no operational conflict between the broad wording of the CMP and the ICC mechanism, validating the tribunal’s composition and the choice of Paris, France, as the seat of arbitration.

The Merits: Extinctive Prescription and Evidentiary Standards for Corruption
On the merits, the Defendants sought a declaration of nullity, alleging procurement violations and an underlying pact of corruption. The Tribunal dismissed the procurement-based nullity claim as time-barred under the five-year extinctive prescription period of the Guinean Civil Code.

Addressing the corruption allegations, the Tribunal reaffirmed that the burden of proof rests strictly on the party asserting it, requiring "grave, precise, and concordant" circumstantial evidence to establish corruption to a preponderance of probabilities. The Tribunal held that the Defendants' evidence—comprising disparate accusations of improper gifts, unproven vehicle transfers, and un-barreled checks—failed to form a coherent, convergent bundle of proof. Consequently, the allegations were rejected.

Award on Liability and Quantum: Abusive Termination and Damages
Finding that GVG fully performed its obligations, the Tribunal ruled the termination abusive. While it rejected GVG's attempt to invalidate a 2012 Addendum that reduced its fee structure, it awarded GVG $6,824,441.28 for unpaid invoices and $14,973,258.19 in damages for the unexpired term, totaling $21,797,699.47 plus 2% simple interest, alongside a partial allocation of arbitration costs.