1 OAPI member states include Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Togo. See: <http://www.oapi.int/index.php/en/aipo/etats-membres> (last accessed 17 November 2014).

2 The ARIPO member states include Botswana, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe: ARIPO “Member states”, available at: <http://www.aripo.org/index.php/about-aripo/membership-memberstate> (last accessed 17 November 2014).

3 There are currently 54 independent countries in Africa following the independence of the Republic of South Sudan on 9 July 2011. See T Tekle “African Union accepts South Sudan as a new member state”, available at: <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article39670> (last accessed 2 December 2014). See also African Union “Member states”, available at: <http://au.int/en/member_states/countryprofiles> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

4 Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Libya, Mauritius, Nigeria, Seychelles, South Africa and Tunisia have observer status in the main organs of ARIPO. This is in line with art IV of the Lusaka Agreement on the Creation of the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization of 1976, available at: <http://www.aripo.org/index.php/resources/laws-and-protocols/finish/13-laws-protocols/50-the-lusaka-agreement-on-the-creation-of-the-organization> (last accessed 17 November 2014) (Lusaka Agreement).

5 Mupangavanhu The Regional Integration, above at note * at 117.

6 Ncube, C and Laltaika, E “A new intellectual property organization for Africa” (2013) 8/2Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Policy 114CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 115.

7 Nwauche, ES “An evaluation of the African regional intellectual property right systems” (2003) 6/1The Journal of World Intellectual Property 101CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 136. See also Adewopo, A “Trademark systems in Africa: A proposal for the harmonization of the ARIPO and the OAPI agreements on marks” (2003) 6/3The Journal of World Intellectual Property 473CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 483; and Joreiman, SF “Inherited legal systems and effective rule of law: Africa and the colonial legacy” (2001) 39/4Journal of African Studies 571Google Scholar at 576.

8 Some member states of both organizations (such as Mozambique) are, however, neither English nor French speaking.

9 AU “Establishing a Pan-African Intellectual Property Organization (PAIPO): A concept paper”: AU doc Ext/ AU/EXP/ST/ 8 (II).

10 Id at para 6. See also Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6; and Blakeney, M and Mengistie, G “Intellectual property policy formulation in LDCs in sub-Saharan Africa” (2011) 19 African Journal of International & Comparative Law 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 71.

11 Blakeney, M and Mengistie, G “Geographical indications and economic development” in Mazzanti, IM and Monti, A (eds) Geographical Indications: Case Studies of Agricultural Products in Africa (2012, Earthscan Publications) 86Google Scholar at 92.

12 Art 2 of the Final Draft Statute of the Pan-African Intellectual Property Organization, available at: <http://www.au.int/fr/sites/default/files/PAIPO%20Statute%20English.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014). See also ARIPO “Recent intellectual property development in the African region and proposals for the harmonization of ARIPO and OAPI systems” (Council of Ministers 13th session held in Accra, Republic of Ghana, 1–2 December 2011) at 2, available at: <http://www.aripo.org/index.php/component/jdownloads/finish/1-council-of-ministers-13th-session/8-aripo-cm-xiii-13-recent-intellectual-property-developments-in-africa?Itemid=273> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

13 Deere, CThe Implementation Game: The RIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries (2009, Oxford Publication)Google Scholar at 268.

14 Art 3(c) of the Constitutive Act of the African Union of 2000 (Constitutive Act) provides that one of the AU's objectives is to accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent. The Constitutive Act is available at: <http://www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/ConstitutiveAct_EN.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

15 Gibb, R “Regional integration and Africa's development trajectory” (2009) 30/4Third World Quarterly 701CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 703. See also Mukamanana, R and Moeti, K “Challenges of regional integration in Africa: Policy and administrative implications” (2005) Journal of Public Administration 90Google Scholar at 91; and S Schifferes “Globalisation shakes the world” (21 January 2007), available at: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6279679.stm> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

16 Regional integration is more of a self-reliance mechanism for African countries and an answer to the economic problems that the continent continues to experience. See Erasmus, G and Hartzenberg, T “The tripartite free trade area: Towards a new African integration paradigm” in Trade Law Centre for Southern Africa (Tralac) The Tripartite Free Trade Area: Towards a New African Integration Paradigm? (2012, Tralac Publication) 1Google Scholar at 9.

17 Robson, PEconomic Integration in Africa (2011, Routledge)Google Scholar at 12. See also Erasmus and Hartzenberg “The tripartite free trade area”, id at 9.

18 Economy of scale refers to the conditions when the average cost of production falls as the quantity of goods produced rises; this is the cost advantage that an enterprise obtains due to expansion. An increase in inputs must bring about more than a “doubling of output”: Baumol, WJ and Blinder, ASMicroeconomics: Principles and Policy (12th ed, 2011, Cengage Learning Publication)Google Scholar at 143. See also Knoop, TARecessions and Depressions: Understanding Business Cycles (2010, Praeger Publication)Google Scholar at 29.

19 Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6 at 115.

20 Blackhurst, R, Lyakurwa, B and Oyejide, A “Options for improving Africa's participation in the WTO” (2002) 23/4World Economy 491CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 497.

21 Kessie, E and Apea, Y “The participation of African countries in the multilateral trading system” in Yusuf, AA (ed) African Yearbook of International Law (2004, Martinus Nijhoff Publication) 9Google Scholar at 11.

22 SF Musungu “International intellectual property standard setting: A review of the role of Africa in shaping the rules for the regulation of the knowledge economy” in Yusuf id, 169 at 185–86.

23 The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Annex 1C to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, signed in Marrakesh, Morocco on 15 April 1994) is argued to be far from responding to the needs and objectives of developing countries. See: Kongolo, T “The WTO settlement mechanism: TRIPS ruling and the developing countries” (2005) 4/2The Journal of World Intellectual Property 257CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 268.

24 Tussies, D “Regionalism: Providing a substance to multilateralism?” in Shaw, TM and Soderbaum, F (eds) Theories of New Regionalism (2003, Palgrave Macmillan) 99Google Scholar at 115.

25 Stiglitz, JGlobalisation and its Discontents (2002, The Penguin Press)Google Scholar at ix.

26 Ibid.

27 The idea that PAIPO should be able to create a platform that enhances policy discussion and the formulation of a common negotiating position is reflected in the preamble to the Final Draft.

28 Nwauche “An evaluation”, above at note 7 at 138.

29 The Final Draft, art 3.

30 AU “Assembly of the African Union eighth ordinary session” (doc: Assembly/AU/Dec.138(VIII)), available at: <http://www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/ASSEMBLY_EN_29_30_JANUARY_2007_AUC_THE_AFRICAN_UNION_EIGHTH_ORDINARY_SESSION.pdf> (last accessed 17 December 2014).

31 Preamble to the Final Draft.

32 Kongolo, T “The African Intellectual Property Organization: The necessity of adopting one uniform system for all Africa” (2000) 3/2Journal of World Intellectual Property 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 282.

33 Art 4(2)(h) of the Abuja Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community (1991), available at: <http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/regeco_treaties/text.jsp?file_id=173333> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

34 A common market has no or few barriers between the member states and also implements a common trade policy towards non-member countries: Venter, D and Neuland, ERegional Integration: Economic Partnership Agreements for Eastern and Southern Africa (2007, Richard Havenga & Associates)Google Scholar at 36. The AU Commission is mandated to foresee regional integration and is also responsible for the harmonization and rationalization of regional economic communities: “The AU Commission”, available at: <http://www.au.int/en/commission> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

35 This linkage is evidenced by TRIPS and regional trade agreements which incorporate IP provisions. See Wong, T “Intellectual property through the lens of human development” in Wong, T and Dutfield, G (eds) Intellectual Property and Human Development: Current Trends and Future Scenarios (2010, Cambridge University Press) 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 46; Drahos, P “Developing countries and international intellectual property standard-setting” (2005) 5/5The Journal of World Intellectual Property 765CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 776; and Sikoyo, GM, Nyukuri, E and Wakhungu, JWIntellectual Property Protection in Africa: Status of Laws, Research and Policy, Analysis in Ghana, Kenya, South Africa and Uganda (Ecopolicy no 16, 2006, Acts Press)Google Scholar at 3.

36 Nwauche “An evaluation”, above at note 7 at 103. See also Colston, C and Galloway, JModern Intellectual Property Law (3rd ed, 2010, Routledge)Google Scholar at 13; JA Lewis “Intellectual property protection: Promoting innovation in a global information economy” (a report of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies Technology and Public Policy Program, 2008) at 7; and Blakeney and Mengistie “Intellectual property policy”, above at note 10 at 68.

37 Trademark rights are acquired at national level, meaning that a right is only effective in the country in which it was registered: Colston and Galloway, id at 13; and Dinwoodie, G “Trademarks and territory: Detaching trademark law from the nation-state” (2004) 14/3Houston Law Review 886Google Scholar at 901.

38 Erasmus and Hartzenberg “The tripartite free trade area”, above at note 16 at 1.

39 Id at 3.

40 G Erasmus “Legal and institutional aspects of the tripartite free trade area: The need for effective implementation” in Tralac The Tripartite Free Trade Area, above at note 16, 8 at 12; and Erasmus and Hartzenberg “The tripartite free trade area”, above at note 16 at 3.

41 Erasmus “Legal and institutional aspects”, id at 8.

42 Ibid.

43 Africa has 54 countries in total as stated earlier.

44 The establishment of the T-FTA is therefore not proposed as an ad hoc plan but as a core building bloc in the new paradigm of African integration: Erasmus “Legal and institutional aspects”, above at note 40 at 12. See also the preamble to the Draft Agreement Establishing COMESA, EAC and SADC Tripartite Free Trade Area, available at: <http://www.tralac.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/12/files/2011/uploads/Draft_Tripartite_FTA_Agreement_Revised_Dec_2010.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014); this provides that member states are committed to “championing and expediting the continental integration process under the Treaty establishing the African Economic Community and the Constitutive Act of the African Union through regional initiatives”.

45 Erasmus ibid.

46 The challenges that arise as a result of overlapping membership include duplication of efforts and resources, and conflict of interests; furthermore the overlap tends to run counter to regional goals and leads to counter-productive or unhealthy competition among countries and institutions. See Geda, A and Kebre, H “Regional economic integration in Africa: A review of problems and prospects with a case study of COMESA” (2008) 17/3Journal of African Economies 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 361; Dlagnekova, P “The need to harmonise trade-related laws within countries of the African Union: An introduction to the problems posed by legal divergence” (2009) 15/1Fundamina 1Google Scholar at 14; and A Ndomo “Regional economic communities in Africa: A progress overview” (a study commissioned by GTZ, 2009) at 10.

47 Erasmus “Legal and institutional aspects”, above at note 40 at 11.

48 Africa is viewed as having created a culture of overly ambitious time frames, as demonstrated by free trade areas and customs unions that have not always been fully implemented and deadlines having been frequently missed: T Fundira “Prospects for attaining a continental free trade area: Amidst a culture of missed deadlines in Africa” (2012, Tralac), available at: <http://www.tralac.org/discussions/article/5297-prospects-for-attaining-a-continental-free-trade-area-amidst-a-culture-of-missed-deadlines-in-africa.html> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

49 The critical issues regarding the rules of origin include the need to make them predictable and open to uniform interpretation. As a result, the T-FTA should harmonize the rules so that they become one: Erasmus “Legal and institutional aspects”, above at note 40 at 14.

50 Adewopo “Trademark systems in Africa”, above at note 7 at 476. Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6 at 115.

51 AL Arowolo “A continental approach to protecting traditional knowledge systems and related resources in Africa” (2009), available at: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1313582&download=yes> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

52 Generally, an organization's objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable and realistic (SMART criteria): Gross, JDimensions of Organization Development (2009, Ocean Publishing)Google Scholar at 41; and Hillson, D “Enterprise risk management: Managing uncertainty and minimising surprise” in Bourne, L (ed) Advising Upwards: A Framework for Understanding and Engaging Senior Management Stakeholders (2011, Gower Publication) 57Google Scholar at 66.

53 The Final Draft, art 5.

54 Kongolo, TAfrican Contributions in Shaping the Worldwide Intellectual Property System (2013, Ashgate)Google Scholar at 129.

55 The Final Draft, art 6.

56 Kongolo African Contributions, above at note 54 at 129.

57 Id “The African Intellectual Property Organization”, above at note 32 at 265. It should be noted that WIPO currently gives assistance to African countries in relation to IP standards under its technical and capacity building programmes at the request of member states. Its focus is to assist African member states in their effort to build national capacities to enable them to take full advantage of their IP systems. The object is to ensure that each country has in place a strong, inclusive and comprehensive national IP system that benefits citizens by allowing them to create, protect, promote and commercialize IP assets. PAIPO's goal to set IP standards that reflect the need of member states will, as a result, reinforce WIPO's programmes. One would, therefore, expect that the collaborated efforts in assisting African countries should result in the benefits of IP being realized on the continent: WIPO “Support to NEPAD” (period report, July 2008 – June 2009), available at: <http://www.un.org/africa/osaa/2009_un_system/WIPO.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

58 An IP strategy entails formulating an IP policy at the national level that sets out how the IP system can be utilized for development benefits or economic growth.

59 OAPI director general, PE Edou “Raising awareness in West Africa” (February 2011) WIPO Magazine, available at: <http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/01/article_0007.html> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

60 Yu, PKIntellectual Property and Information Wealth: Issues and Practices in the Digital Age (2007, Greenwood Publishing Group)Google Scholar at ix; and Lewis “Intellectual property protection”, above at note 36 at 1.

61 The Final Draft, art 6(x).

62 A very considerable amount of time and resources is taken up with the administration of infrastructure, which includes training IP personnel: Blakeney and Mengistie “Intellectual property policy”, above at note 10 at 68.

63 The Final Draft, art 6(xi). Similarly, one of ARIPO's objectives is to promote the exchange of ideas and experience, research and studies relating to IP, and to assist its members in the acquisition and development of technology; see the Lusaka Agreement, art III.

64 The Final Draft, art 6(3) provides that PAIPO shall: “Facilitate the realisation and harmonization of national legislation and regional treaties and intellectual property standards in all the AU levels”.

65 Harmonization is thus a process where diverse elements adapt to form a coherent whole while retaining their individuality: Boodman, M “The myth of harmonization of laws” (1991) 39/4The American Journal of Comparative Law 699CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 702; Wandrag, R “Unification of Southern African contract law” (2011) 13 European Journal of Law ReformGoogle Scholar (African Conference on International Commercial Law issue) 451 at 455; and Ferreira-Snyman, MP and Ferreira, G “The harmonization of laws within the African Union and the viability of legal pluralism as an alternative” (2010) 73 Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law 608Google Scholar at 614.

66 Art 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that: “To exercise the Union's competences, the institutions shall adopt regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions. A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all member states. A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each member state to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods. A decision shall be binding in its entirety upon those to whom it is addressed. Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force.” Treaty available at: <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=EN> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

67 Duina, FGHarmonising Europe: Nation-States Within the Common Market (1999, State University of New York Press)Google Scholar at 5.

68 Ibid.

69 The Constitutive Act, arts 18 and 20. See Makinda, SM and Okumu, FWThe African Union: Challenges of Globalisation, Security and Governance (2008, Routledge)Google Scholar at 132.

70 Protocol of the Court of Justice of the African Union, art 19, available at: <http://www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/PROTOCOL_COURT_OF_JUSTICE_OF_THE_AFRICAN_UNION.pdf> (last accessed 16 December 2014).

71 C Ncube “Piping up on PAIPO”, available at: <http://afro-ip.blogspot.com/2012/10/piping-up-on-paipo.html> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

72 Ibid.

73 The Final Draft, art 6(2).

74 Kongolo African Contributions, above at note 54 at 130.

75 Id at 131.

76 Ibid.

77 Ibid.

78 Art 2 of the Agreement Revising the Bangui Agreement of 2 March 1977 on the Creation of an African Intellectual Property Organisation (Bangui Agreement), available at: <http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/other_treaties/text.jsp?file_id=181151> (last accessed 2 December 2014); Dean, O “A unified intellectual property law system for Southern Africa” (1994) 2 Juta's Business Law 165Google Scholar at 165.

79 Ncube “Piping up on PAIPO”, above at note 71. See also D Kawooya “A new course for the Pan African Intellectual Property Organization is urgently needed” (2012) available at: <https://www.change.org/p/a-new-course-for-the-pan-african-intellectual-property-organization-is-urgently-needed> (last accessed 3 December 2014).

80 Kongolo African Contributions, above at note 54 at 128.

81 Oluwu, D “Regional integration, development and the African Union agenda: Challenges, gaps and opportunities” (2003) 13 Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems 211Google Scholar at 250.

82 Comparatively, the EU commenced with a mass awareness campaign that had trailed the idea of integrating the EU since the 1930s, especially after the Cold War. In contrast, African integration had no focus on educating the population about regional integration. Regional integration may well have been moving forward slowly due to the citizenry's lack of knowledge about the agenda: UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) Assessing Regional Integration in Africa II: Rationalising Regional Economic Communities (2006, UNECA)Google Scholar at 130, available at: <http://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/publications/aria2_eng.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

83 This includes trades unions, employers' organizations, private entrepreneurs and non-governmental organizations. Oluwu correctly explains that strong non-governmental participation is a key factor in achieving the goals of regional integration: Oluwu “Regional integration”, above at note 81 at 250.

84 In the EU, successful regional integration schemes were the result of combined efforts, not only the work of governments. The EU example is instructive for the AU's objective of integrating the region.

85 Art 3(g) of the Constitutive Act sets out as one of the AU's objectives to promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance. Art 4 acknowledges “participation of the African peoples in the activities of the Union” as one of the principles upon which the AU functions.

86 UNECA Assessing Regional Integration, above at note 82 at 130.

87 The private sector brings economic development through job creation, investment and the production of goods: UNECA Assessing Regional Integration IV: Enhancing Intra-African Trade (2010, UNECA) at 32, available at: <http://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/publications/aria4full.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014). See also Oluwu “Regional integration”, above at note 81 at 251.

88 The Final Draft, art 6(i).

89 It has also been argued that South Africa (which is not a member of ARIPO or OAPI) does not have IP laws that adequately protect traditional knowledge. See Mukuka, GIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Intellectual Property Laws in South Africa: ‘Reap What You Have Not Sown’ (2010, Pretoria University Law Press Publication)Google Scholar at 23.

90 Arowolo “A continental approach”, above at note 51.

91 This concept of individual property ownership is alien and does not necessarily focus on a group's or collective right to protect and benefit from its own cultural discoveries, creations and products. See Hansen, SA and Van Fleet, JWTraditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property: A Handbook on Issues and Options for Traditional Knowledge Holders in Protecting Their Intellectual Property and Maintaining Biological Diversity (2003, American Association for the Advancement of Science)Google Scholar at 4; Oguamanam, CInternational Law and Indigenous Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights, Plant Biodiversity and Traditional Medicine (2006, University of Toronto Press Incorporated Publication)CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 8 and 29.

92 Mukuka Indigenous Knowledge Systems, above at note 89 at 19.

93 It should be noted that proposals have been made for the development of the sui generis [by class] protection of IP rights. The territoriality of IP rights and their international alignment, as well as global trade practices, indicate the need for an international solution regarding the protection of traditional knowledge. The question that lingers is whether WIPO's sui generis system of protection will provide adequate protection. See G Dutfield “Protecting traditional knowledge and folklore: A review of proposals in diplomacy and policy formulation” (2003, UN Conference on Trade and Development, and International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development Publication) at 22, available at: <http://www.ictsd.org/downloads/2008/06/cs_dutfield.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014). See also WIPO “Traditional knowledge and intellectual property: Background brief”, available at: <http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/briefs/tk_ip.html> (last accessed 2 December 2014); and Kiene, TThe Legal Protection of Traditional Knowledge in the Pharmaceutical Field: An Intercultural Problem on the International Agenda (2011, Waxmann Publication)Google Scholar at 58.

94 Kongolo “The African Intellectual Property Organization”, above at note 32 at 268.

95 Phaswana, N and Tanziani, D “African intellectual property law and newly emerging African economies, with an emphasis on South Africa” in Taplin, R and Nowak, AZ (eds) Intellectual property, Innovation and Management in Emerging Economies (2010, Routledge Publication)Google Scholar 42 at 42.

96 Kongolo “The African Intellectual Property Organization”, above at note 32 at 265.

97 Dinwoodie, GB and Dreyfuss, RC “Enhancing global innovation policy: The role of WIPO and its conventions in interpreting the TRIPS Agreement” in Correa, CM (ed) Research Handbook on the Protection of Intellectual Property Under WTO rules: Intellectual property in the WTO vol 1 (1st ed, 2010, Edward Elgar Publication) 110Google Scholar at 111; and Sikoyo et al Intellectual Property Protection, above at note 35 at 4.

98 Africa's form of IP (traditional knowledge and folklore) does not fall within “conventional” IP regimes and cannot be protected as it does not fit into the criteria. This is because traditional knowledge is generally held by communities and is passed from one generation to another. The novelty and inventive step criterion appears to pose problems regarding the protection of traditional knowledge, since most of the knowledge would have been used for long periods of time and thus be well known within the community. Traditional knowledge by its nature cannot therefore meet the novelty requirement, since the knowledge may be regarded as already in the public domain. This implies that neither the indigenous people themselves nor third parties may patent this knowledge under existing IP frameworks. There is a need to ensure the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore because of its relevance to Africa. The Final Draft needs to put greater emphasis on these forms of IP. See WIPO “Intellectual property and traditional knowledge” (booklet no 2, WIPO publication no 920 (E)) at 6; and Kiene The Legal Protection of Traditional Knowledge, above at note 93 at 52.

99 The Final Draft, art 6.

100 Swakopmund Protocol on the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore Within the Framework of ARIPO, available at: <http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/text.jsp?file_id=201022> (last accessed 3 December 2014).

101 Kongolo African Contributions, above at note 54 at 131–32.

102 Ibid.

103 Ibid.

104 The Final Draft, arts 14 and 16.

105 D Kohnert “EU-African economic relations: Continuing dominance, traded for aid?” (Institute of African Affairs at German Institute of Global and Area Studies working paper, 3 July 2008) at 9, available at: <http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/9434/1/MPRA_paper_9434.pdf> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

106 It is argued that the existence of French, English and Portuguese speaking countries in Africa poses a challenge to the newly proposed organization in what should become its official languages.

107 Morcom, C, Roughton, A and Graham, JThe Modern Law of Trademarks (1999, Butterworth)Google Scholar at 23.5.

108 Council Regulation No 40/94 of 1993, art 115.

109 Constitutive Act, art 25. See Makinda and Okumu The African Union, above at note 69 at 133.

110 The preamble to the Agreement Revising the Bangui Agreement, above at note 78, states that member states “desire to promote the effective contribution of intellectual property to the development of their States on the one hand, and [are] concerned on the other hand to protect intellectual property rights on their territories in as effective and uniform a manner as possible”.

111 The aim of the agreement was to create a body responsible for the application of joint administrative procedures resulting from a uniform regime of IP protection.

112 The Bangui Agreement also provides extensive protection for existing IP: Kongolo, T “The new OAPI Agreement as revised in February 1999: Complying with TRIPS” (2005) 3/5The Journal of World Intellectual Property 717CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 735.

113 OAPI serves as a national office under the Patent Cooperation Treaty of 1970 (which was modified in 2001) and under the Trade mark Registration Treaty of 1973 (which has since been amended).

114 Kongolo “The African Intellectual Property Organization”, above at note 32 at 273.

115 The ARIPO Central Office is responsible for the administration of trademark applications: Banjul Protocol on Marks Within the Framework of the ARIPO, sec 1, available at: <http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/other_treaties/text.jsp?file_id=345095> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

116 Id, secs 5 and 6. See also Blakeney and Mengistie “Geographical indications”, above at note 11 at 91.

117 Id, sec 6(2).

118 Ibid.

119 Ibid.

120 International Trademark Association “Adherence to the ARIPO Banjul Protocol” (May 2000), available at: <http://www.inta.org/Advocacy/Pages/AdherencetotheARIPOBanjulProtocol.aspx> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

121 Nwauche “An evaluation”, above at note 7 at 134.

122 Blakeney and Mengistie “Geographical indications”, above at note 11 at 91.

123 Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6 at 116.

124 It reads: “Initiate activities that strengthen the human, financial and technical capacity of Member States to maximize the benefits of the intellectual property system to improve public health and eradicate the scourge of piracy and counterfeits on the continent … ”: the Final Draft, art 5(vi).

125 Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6 at 116.

126 Ibid.

127 WIPO “Inter-sessional intergovernmental meeting on a development agenda for WIPO, third session, Geneva, July 20 to 22, 2005”: WIPO doc IIM/3/2 rev (31 July 2005).

128 WIPO “Development Agenda Group (DAG), DAG guiding principles paper”: WIPO doc CDIP/5/9 rev (26 April 2010), para 1.

129 Nwauche “An evaluation”, above at note 7 at 135; and TIS Gerhandsen “Concern arises over proposed pan-African IP organization” (30 August 2007) Intellectual Property Watch, available at: <http://www.ip-watch.org/2007/08/30/concern-arises-over-proposed-pan-african-ip-organisation/> (last accessed 2 December 2014).

130 See Art 2(1) of the Agreement Revising the Bangui Agreement, above at note 78.

131 See David, R “The methods of unification” (1968) 16/1American Journal of Comparative Law 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 15; Boele-Woelki, KUnifying and Harmonising Substantive Law and the Role of Conflict of Laws (2010, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers)CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 32–36; Mancusso, S “Trends on the harmonization of contract law in Africa” (2007) 13/1Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law 157Google Scholar at 159; and Fagbayibo, B “Towards the harmonization of laws in Africa: Is OHADA the way to go?” (2009) 42/3Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa 309Google Scholar at 311.

132 The different instruments that are used to achieve the harmonization of laws include model laws, restatements, principles and rules. Court decisions and legislative measures may also result in the approximation of laws of different jurisdictions: Boele-Woelki, id at 35. See also Glenn, HP “Conflicting laws in a common market? The NAFTA experiment” (2001) 76 Chicago-Kent Law Review 1789Google Scholar at 1794.

133 Mancusso “Trends on the harmonization”, above at note 131 at 159.

134 Blakeney and Mengistie “Geographical indications”, above at note 11 at 91.

135 Ibid.

136 Ibid.

137 ARIPO “Recent intellectual property development”, above at note 12 at 2. See also Kongolo African Contributions, above at note 54 at 127.

138 Kongolo, ibid.

139 ARIPO “Recent intellectual property development”, above at note 12, paras 4 and 5.

140 Ncube and Laltaika “A new intellectual property organization”, above at note 6 at 117.

141 Ibid.

142 Blakeney and Mengistie “Intellectual property policy”, above at note 10 at 72.

143 AU “Establishing a Pan-African Intellectual Property Organization”, above at note 9.

144 Arowolo “A continental approach”, above at note 51.

145 Issues on IP are technical and require highly skilled and knowledgeable people: Sikoyo et al Intellectual Property Protection, above at note 35 at 24–25.

146 See WIPO “Flexibilities in the context of the development agenda”, available at: <http://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/agenda/flexibilities/flex_dev_agenda.html> (last accessed 3 December 2014).