Connect with us

NGO WORK

What future for seeds under the African Free Trade Area?

Published

on

The African Union is putting the finishing touches to the draft protocol on intellectual property rights to the agreement establishing the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Once ratified, this text will form an integral part of the AfCFTA and will be applied across all 54-member countries. The protocol will apply to all categories of intellectual property, including plant varieties, genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Specifically, it will aim to promote “coherent” intellectual property rights policy and a harmonised system of intellectual property protection throughout the continent (article 2.2.).
Given that intellectual property rights privatise agricultural biodiversity – our collective heritage and the cornerstone of food sovereignty – the implications of this protocol on seeds and the rights of peasants and rural communities in Africa must be carefully analysed.
Around the world, free trade agreements are forcing the privatisation of seeds, whether through patents or plant breeders’ rights. These rights enable seed companies to demand royalty payments from farmers for each generation of seeds they use, over a period of 20 to 25 years. According to seed companies such as Syngenta and Bayer, without these payments they will be unable to invest in research.
This same system is now rapidly gaining ground in Africa, potentially upsetting relationships between citizens within members states, and even between the member states themselves.
Article 8 of the draft protocol addresses this issue. It stipulates that state parties shall provide protection for new plant varieties through a legal system that includes farmers’ rights, plant breeders’ rights, and rules on access and benefit sharing “as appropriate”.
Furthermore, it adds that states shall comply with “additional obligations” set out in an annex to be developed once the protocol is adopted. Upon adoption, this annex, along with the annexes on traditional knowledge and genetic resources, will have the same legal value as the protocol (article 41 of the protocol).
Our analysis of these provisions seeks to address the following questions: What does this protocol mean for African countries? How will they implement it? What impact will it have on farmers and food sovereignty in Africa?
The meaning of the protocol
Spurred on by the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and under pressure from other bodies, half of all African countries have already introduced an intellectual property rights system on seeds. The vast majority follow the model of the 1991 convention of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). (See graph.)
This system is highly criticised for promoting genetic uniformity of crops and preventing peasants from reusing seeds. The question now is whether the AfCFTA protocol will challenge this dominant system. The final draft text suggests that the answer is ‘no’.
Despite progressive-sounding references to farmers’ rights and benefit sharing, the protocol sets out the same requirements as the WTO, i.e., states must set up a plant variety protection system. Given that half the African countries already adhere to the UPOV model, it is highly likely that the AfCFTA protocol will simply reinforce, or even accelerate, this trend.
The protocol’s approach, consisting of requiring both the protection of breeders’ rights and farmers’ rights, as well as rules on access to genetic resources, is a ploy in the sense that the use of “as appropriate” strips it of all relevance. Presented in this way, the provision becomes more of a guideline, with member states left to apply this article in their own territories as they see fit.
Naturally, it will be implemented in line with their existing obligations, whether these stem from the WTO, the African Intellectual Property Organisation (OAPI) or the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO). This “fait accompli”, with half the states already bound to UPOV to varying degrees, makes it difficult, or even impossible, to deviate from the status quo.
UPOV in conflict with all other agreements
As UPOV does not recognise farmers’ rights, whether derived from the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture or the UN Declaration, it enters into direct conflict with these agreements. UPOV refuses to include rules on access to resources and benefit sharing, as set out in the Convention on Biological Diversity or, once again, the FAO Treaty. Since they are not “suitable” for UPOV, these additional elements will not materialise.
The conflict goes further still. In articles 18 and 20, the AfCFTA protocol requires states to oblige breeders to respect three conditions before they are granted a right to a new variety. These three conditions are: (i) to state the source of traditional knowledge or resources utilised in developing the new variety, (ii) to provide proof of free, prior and informed consent from the competent authorities under the relevant national regime, and (iii) to demonstrate proof of fair and equitable benefit sharing arising from the use of such resources or knowledge under the relevant national regime.[1] Yet these conditions do not correspond to UPOV rules, so what is the likely outcome?
It is highly likely that the African countries that conform with UPOV will continue to do so, even if they hardly benefit from it. It may be the case that those who wish to go further will do so, by applying additional conditions. However, we cannot see how governments will change the conditions for granting plant variety rights in UPOV member countries. In these countries, there is a risk that the protocol’s provisions will go unheeded.
It is hard to see how the draft protocol could achieve its objective of promoting coherence and harmonising intellectual property rules and principles in Africa if all AfCFTA member countries are given free rein to implement the protocol’s requirements as they see fit. Perhaps the annexes, which are still being negotiated, will shed light on this.
Conflicting farming models
The draft protocol to the AfCFTA agreement comes at a crucial time for Africa. The continent is divided in two on how it views the future of agriculture in Africa and the role of farmers. Some advocate and adhere to the idea of agribusiness taking a lead, with or without the involvement of small farmers. Others are seeking to strengthen family, peasant and autonomous farming and agroecology. These two rather opposing approaches are based on completely different seed systems and discussions about rights.
Across a number of countries, the industrial system promoted by UPOV is coming under fire. This can be seen in Benin, where farmers’ organisations are taking a stand against the government’s proposal to join UPOV. This is also evident in Kenya and Ghana, where legal proceedings are underway to amend or declare unconstitutional UPOV-based plant variety laws. Furthermore, in Southern Africa, a campaign to block alignment with UPOV, precisely because of the threats it poses to family farming in the sub-region, is slowing down progress on the ARIPO project. It can be seen in Tunisia and Mali, where civil society organisations are promoting a completely different approach to seed laws, based on the demands and criteria of the farming communities themselves. Lastly, it is apparent from the many initiatives and caravans run by local communities in alliance with others, lobbying local authorities and raising public awareness to call for an end to UPOV in favour of fundamental respect for farmers’ rights.
This conflict between production models and rights systems is reflected in the field of animal farming. The government of Burkina Faso was recently granted an exclusive right to the term “poulet bicyclette” (“bicycle chicken”, a common term for native chicken). It is a registered trademark and applies to live chickens, chicken meat and veterinary products for chickens. This exclusive right is effective in all 17-member countries of OAPI for a period of 10 years. However, the term “bicycle chicken” has been used across Western and Central Africa for a very long time to refer to local breeds, peasant breeds. It represents a collective heritage and is central to many agroecology projects. Benin has now banned the sale of frozen chickens, known as “morgue chickens”, across its territory in order to promote the farming of native chicken breeds, i.e., “their” bicycle chickens. Will the government of Burkina Faso exercise its veto or monopoly rights against this policy? Even the AfCFTA protocol supports this approach.
Original Source: Grain

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

As World Bank Holds Annual Meetings, 84,000 Tanzanians Call for Justice

Published

on

Oakland, CA – As the World Bank convenes its Annual Meetings in Thailand this week, the accountability of the institution is entirely omitted from the agenda. Yet, its lack of accountability to the millions of people displaced or harmed by its programs around the world has never been more appalling.

The Bank claims that recent 2026 reforms would strengthen its accountability mechanism, but the facts show a total disregard for the devastation it has caused. In Tanzania, it has failed to act on damning findings from its own Inspection Panel – whose investigation detailed systemic violations of its own Operating Procedures and a “critical failure” in project planning and supervision, leaving local villagers to continue bearing the brunt of harsh, unmitigated serious harms.

Between 2017-2024, the World Bank poured over US$100 million into REGROW, doubling the size of Ruaha National Park in Southern Tanzania and funding the paramilitary park rangers (TANAPA) implicated in egregious human rights abuses – including killings and forced disappearances. Following an independent investigation, the project was officially cancelled.

“The park expansion effectively criminalized over 84,000 people on their own land, stripping them of their livelihoods by barring essential farming and grazing. The Bank’s REGROW initiative turned poor villagers into targets for park rangers. Despite clear evidence that the devastation it unleashed continues today, the Bank has completely failed to provide redress, compensate or support the communities whose lives it upended,” said Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of the Oakland Institute, who represented villagers in their complaint to the Inspection panel.

Image
Women threatened by RUNAPA’s expansion in Mbarali District. The Oakland Institute

In April 2025, ignoring community demands for reparations and the return of land, the Board approved a largely insufficient and inadequate Management Action Plan (MAP). On September 4, 2026, the Bank officially “closed” the REGROW case after deeming all actions in the MAP had been completed.

“The World Bank has destroyed our lives. Since the project started, rangers have killed or disappeared 18 of us. We are banned from farming our lands and grazing our livestock. Thousands of our cattle were confiscated. We are still waiting for justice and reparations for our losses. How can the World Bank walk away after being found responsible for this catastrophe?” said a local villager who filed the initial complaint.

Today, despite the Bank’s assertions that livelihoods could resume, many farmers remain barred from their fields, and pastoralists face continuous threats and fines for grazing cattle. The international spotlight that the Institute put on the dire situation has brought a halt to fatal shootings by TANAPA rangers since May 2025 – a grim baseline for “progress” from a paramilitary force that has terrorized communities since the Bank bolstered their capacity. The families of those murdered by TANAPA, including 27-year-old Hamprey Mhaki and 20-year-old Kulwa Igembe, continue to be denied justice.

“The Inspection Panel presented undeniable evidence of the Bank’s wrongdoings, yet the Bank’s Board and senior management refused to take responsibility. Affected communities took monumental personal and collective risks to expose these abuses, offering the Bank every opportunity to correct course. Instead, management turned its back on the very people it harmed – leaving a permanent stain on the institution’s credibility. The Oakland Institute will continue to stand with communities in their fight for justice,” concluded Mittal.

The World Bank’s expanding accountability crisis is further deepened by its decision to join the Trump-established Board of Peace (BoP) for Gaza, proactively enabling impunity for crimes against humanity and genocide. By joining the BoP, the Bank directly violates its own mandate and policies, international humanitarian law and decades of UN General Assembly Resolutions. Furthermore, the move defies provisional orders and advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and rulings from the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Tanzanian Government Abducts Maasai Villagers in an Unconscionable Attack on Indigenous Land Defenders

Published

on

  • Human rights conditions in northern Tanzania have deteriorated sharply since August, as the Tanzanian government carries out a coordinated campaign of violence and arrests against the Indigenous Maasai.
  • In Ngorongoro, five Maasai were arrested last week; Over 30 community members have been arrested over the last two months; In neighboring Loliondo, thousands of livestock have been confiscated.
  • The government is pressuring Maasai to leave the area to reach its goal of expanding the number of safari tourists and trophy hunters to eight million by 2030.
  • The last arbitrary arrests unfolded in Arusha as Tanzania hosted the 153rd Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, centered on the theme of “enhancing good governance and empowering communities through inclusivity, trust and opportunities for all.”

Oakland, CA – On the night of October 6, the Tanzanian government forcefully abducted five Maasai men, Nangei Meitaya, Salangat Makko, Ezekiel Kishau, Dickson and Thadeus Clamian, holding them under arbitrary detention at the Arusha Central Police Station. While the individuals were released the following night, these targeted arrests are a dangerous escalation in the government’s systemic oppression of the Indigenous Maasai people.

Since August, human rights conditions in northern Tanzania have worsened sharply as the state carries out a wave of coordinated violence and arrests against the Maasai. In the Ngorongoro Division, authorities have detained more than 30 community members, while confiscations of livestock have intensified in neighboring Loliondo. Local advocates state these actions are part of a systemic campaign to suppress peaceful dissent and dismantle civil society, through economic restrictions, intimidation, and unlawful incarceration of Maasai pastoralists.

“Far from being an isolated incident, this is a calculated campaign of intimidation. Driven by its goal to attract eight million safari tourists by 2030, the Tanzanian government is escalating pressure to evict the Maasai from their ancestral lands. As a result, community leaders have been driven into hiding once again, describing a rapidly deteriorating situation across the region,” said Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of the Oakland Institute.

While detained, the victims were deprived access to their families or legal counsel. Four of those arrested are employees of the Pastoral Women’s Council (PWC), a local NGO dedicated to the “sustainable empowerment of Indigenous pastoralist women and girls in northern Tanzania.” Furthermore, authorities searched the homes of other staff members without due process.

“The abduction and subsequent detention of our community members is one of the many incidents of lawless targeting of the Maasai people in Ngorongoro – a deliberate campaign to instill fear and censorship, designed to make state dispossession and displacement easy. When a regime normalizes abductions and uses public hospitals as hunting grounds, it reveals a complete breakdown of common sense and basic humanity,” said Joseph Moses Oleshangay, a prominent Maasai human rights lawyer and activist from the Ngorongoro District in Tanzania.

Image
Tanzanian police forcing Maasai people out of their ancestral land in Loliondo, Ngorongoro District to build a game reserve, June 2022

The arbitrary arrests unfolded in Arusha as Tanzania hosted the 153rd Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, centered on the theme of “enhancing good governance and empowering communities through inclusivity, trust and opportunities for all.” This international gathering of parliamentarians from around the world comes a year after the rigged October 2025 national elections, during which the security forces violently suppressed pro-democracy demonstrations and killed thousands of civilians. Meanwhile, in March 2026, President Hassan accepted recommendations from sham land commissions advocating for the widespread eviction of Maasai communities from their ancestral lands in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) and Loliondo.

The government plans to drastically reduce Maasai presence in the NCA to expand safari tourism and trophy hunting. To pressure residents to leave, the government has stopped basic medical, education, and water services while restricting access to grazing land for pastoralists. Massive mobilizations by the Maasai against this forced resettlement have exposed the government’s lie that people are leaving willingly.

“As international visitors plan safari tours to Tanzania, they must recognize that tourism revenues are inadvertently financing the government’s violent attack on Maasai communities whose ancestral lands are being stolen in plain sight,” concluded Mittal.

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Global Scramble for Minerals Wages War on People and Planet

Published

on

Last week, 54 members of Congress called for transparency and stronger protections for labor rights, human rights, and the environment in the Trump administration’s critical minerals deals. The Oakland Institute had been advocating towards Congressional representatives, urging them to sign the letter to the administration.

But what is really driving the global race for minerals?

Our new report, RUSH: Global Scramble for Minerals Wages War on People and Planet, has debunked the claim that massive new mining is necessary to address the climate crisis. More than 70% of current mineral demand comes from industries outside of the energy transition, including the military, automotive, aerospace, and technology sectors. The report, instead, exposes the prevailing cronyism of the US administration, with companies linked to the families of Donald Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick profiteering from US mineral deals.

What is driving the global mining boom? What is at stake?

Read the report

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates