This article discusses the protection of new plant varieties in Africa and the African Model Law through the lens of its key protagonist, Professor Johnson Ekpere. It urges African countries to consult the African Model Law as a guide when designing plant variety protection systems. It is hoped that by offering Professor Ekpere's biography, personal experiences, and first-hand account of the African Model Law, African countries may better understand the Model Law as a significant response to the small-scale-farmer- and farming-community-centred agricultural systems on the continent and embrace its continued relevance.

This paper discusses how African organisations and countries construct their geographical indication (GI) systems. It makes three primary arguments. First, that the nascent GI agenda in Africa is driven by the European Union (EU) to principally promote European interests.Nonetheless, African countries can benefit from GI regimes by crafting laws that promote African interests. Second, that simply embracing the introduction of GI laws will not result in the EU's promised socioeconomic development in Africa. This is because multifarious factors including infrastructure, investment, branding, marketing and security are required to realise successful GI regimes. Third, that African countries must leverage contextually customised GI regimes to maximise the potentials they present. Contextually customised GI regimes can engender socioeconomic development. Beyond the EU's agenda-setting technologies, international affiliations and treaty boundaries shape GI laws in Africa, which inform the marked variation in its GI systems. This variation reflects the dissonance in international treaties for GIs. While African countries align with demandeurs that espouse stronger GIs laws at the international level, the only regional instrument on GIs in Africa is its Continental Strategy for GIs. In examining examples from the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle, the African Regional Intellectual Property

No abstract

No abstract

Nigeria does not currently have a plant variety protection system. Three key reasons why Nigerian law and policy makers should pay attention to plant variety protection are the country's evolving agricultural sector, susceptibility to external pressures and pending international obligations. From 2010, successive Nigerian governments have promoted private sector investments in agriculture, contributing to the increase in the number of agribusinesses in the country. Agribusinesses tend to lobby for the introduction or reform of national plant variety protection systems to suit their business interests. Furthermore, as a founding member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Nigeria has a pending obligation under Article 27.3(b) of the Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) to protect plant varieties through a patent system, a sui generis system, or a combination of systems. This article argues that Nigeria should proactively introduce a plant variety protection system designed to suit its socio‐economic realities before it is pressured to adopt an unsuitable system. In assessing the options under TRIPS vis‐a‐vis the small‐scale centered agricultural sector in Nigeria, the article finds that the best‐suited option for the country is a sui generis system which protects the interests of both small‐scale farmers and agribusinesses.