Symposium Posts

The article analyses the High Court’s decision in Wathome & 14 others v Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service & another; Greenpeace Environmental Kenya & 2 others (Interested Parties) [2025] KEHC 18166 (KLR) (the Wathome Decision), focusing on the arguments advanced and the Court’s response to the tension between plant variety protection and farmers’ rights. Finally, it reflects on what a more balanced legal and policy framework might entail, while also engaging with emerging challenges related to the place of genetically modified crops and the growing reliance on toxic agrochemical inputs in food production.

In late November 2025, the Machakos High Court in Kenya issued an unprecedented judgment that was noteworthy. The judgment was not limited to legal correction; it struck down the key provisions of the Seed and Plant Varieties Act (SPVA). It was a strong assertion of humanity’s dignity, culture, and the right to eco-justice. The Court aligned Kenyan law with constitutional values and international human rights obligations by declaring unconstitutional the laws that criminalized the saving, sharing, and sale of farm-saved and Indigenous seeds. The UN human rights experts have recognised this judgement as a landmark for the rights of peasants and food security, and declare it a strong rebuttal against the international trade of seeds through restrictive IP regimes.

The 2025 landmark judgment by the High Court of Kenya in the case of Samuel Wathome and 14 others v Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service and another (Samuel Wathome case) fundamentally reaffirmed a broad conceptualization of the previously diminished farmers’ rights to save, exchange, and sell seeds. There had previously been a discernible trend, since the year 2012, of undermining the farmers’ rights through domestic legislation and the ratification of the 1991 International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) Treaty in 2016. Until the 2025 High Court Judgment, the ratification of UPOV 1991 and consecutive amendments to the Seeds and Plant Varieties Act (SPVA) and its implementation Regulations had resulted in an extremely liberal conceptualization of plant breeder’s rights (PBRs) to an extent that they were patent like. The 2022 amendments to the SPVA and implementing Regulations particularly proceeded to the extent of criminalizing the exchange of ‘unregistered’, ‘uncertified’ and ‘unindexed’ indigenous seeds that have, historically, been part of the African commons.

As debates on seeds and plant varieties continue to evolve in Kenya, this symposium reflects on the case and its significance for the future of seed and plant variety protection in the country. In addition to this introduction, the Symposium comprises three contributions: Tom Kabau’s “Kenya’s Seeds Case: The Enduring African Commons of Plant Genetic Resources,” Wambugu Wanjohi’s “Beyond Breeder Rights: Reclaiming Seed Sovereignty, Food Justice and Cultural Autonomy in Kenya,” and Brian Kibet’s “Whose Seeds, Whose Future? Seed Sovereignty and Farmers’ Rights in Kenya.” Kabau argues that the High Court’s judgment is well-grounded in the realities of agricultural practice in Kenya and affirms the enduring character of plant genetic resources as part of the African commons.

The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is the world’s largest free trade area in terms of the participating countries since the formation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The AfCFTA Agreement brings together 55 African Countries who are contracting member states to the 8 existing Regional Economic Communities in Africa, including the newly formed Alliance of Sahel States (former members of ECOWAS). As of September 2024, 54 of the 55 AU member states have signed the AfCFTA Agreement and 47 have ratified the Agreement. The AfCFTA aims to create a single market for trade in goods and services and allow free access to tradeable commodities across the continent. Although the AfCFTA is not fully operational, meaningful commercial trading has been envisioned through the Guided Trade Initiative (GTI). The GTI is a pilot project that tests the operational, institutional, legal and trade policy environment of the AfCFTA.

Dispute settlement is a central tenet of any economic block as it provides the necessary security and predictability for the state parties. The Architecture of the AfCFTA is reflective of these principles as the AfCFTA Agreement has introduced a rules-based dispute settlement regime which mirrors the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding. The success of the AfCFTA is highly dependent on the effectiveness of the dispute settlement mechanism. In considering the Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM) of the AfCFTA this piece highlights the salient features of the DSM and explores some of the challenges that should be anticipated. This piece fronts the argument that the AfCFTA should have diverged from the traditional dispute settlement mechanisms adopted by the WTO. Further, it attempts to answer the question on whether African States will utilize the DSM given the current status quo of the dismal use of the WTO’s DSM.

L’harmonisation des règles douanières au sein de la ZLECAF est réelle et salutaire. Elle est une réalité puisqu’elle repose essentiellement sur la réduction des droits de douane des Etats membres de la ZLECAF. Cette réalité se manifeste non seulement par l’existence de réelles politiques d’harmonisation des règles douanières mais aussi par un domaine assez précis de l’harmonisation de ces règles. En revanche, l’harmonisation des règles fiscales est éprouvée pour deux raisons : d’abord, l’on note l’absence de politique favorable à l’harmonisation des règles fiscales au sein de la ZLECAF ; ensuite, l’on note l’absence de mesures de coopération entre la ZLECAF et les autres espaces communautaires africains au sein desquels s’est déjà effectuée l’harmonisation fiscale. Pour atteindre l’objectif d’harmonisation des règles fiscales, il est souhaitable qu’une politique d’harmonisation fiscale particulière soit menée au sein de la ZLECAF, laquelle pourrait s’appuyer sur celle déjà menée au sein de l’UEMOA, de la CEMAC.

La mondialisation a créé une interdépendance entre États sur plusieurs plans, notamment sur le plan économique. Cela s’est traduit par la conclusion d’accords économiques visant à faciliter et à multiplier les échanges commerciaux entre États. Toutefois, cette multiplication des échanges commerciaux a aussi révélé de nouveaux défis, qui semblent tout aussi importants que les retombées économiques, tels que la protection des droits de l’homme, la protection de l’environnement, etc. Cette prise en compte de l’environnement apparaît comme un élément indissociable du développement socio-économique et, de ce fait, chaque accord international devrait accorder une place primordiale à la question environnementale. C’est le cas pour certains accords tel que l’Accord économique commercial global (AECG), conclu entre l’Union Européenne et le Canada, qui a davantage mobilisé sur les questions liées à l’impact environnemental du libre-échange que sur ses retombées économique.

The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) has the potential to grow beyond just reducing tariffs. Its success depends on the movement of people, not just goods. Africa needs to develop a shared continental identity, which can ultimately lead to a more integrated free trade area. The African Union recognized this when it created the 2018 Protocol on the Free Movement of Persons, which has experienced slower rates of adoption and ratification (Hirsch, 2021). The free movement of individuals is considered crucial for achieving the objectives of the AfCFTA and promoting regional integration. Lessons from other regional integration models, such as the European Union, may provide valuable insights into overcoming challenges and advancing the free movement agenda. These examples highlight that trust, cultural exchanges, and familiarity are crucial to a better integrated African free trade Area.

L'intégration économique régionale entendue comme « un processus qui conduit plusieurs économies distinctes à former un seul espace économique » (Beitone, Cazorla, Dollo, Drai, Dictionnaire de science économique, p. 290) régional représente un enjeu majeur pour le développement des États. Cette intégration économique est organisée en degrés correspondants aux différentes formes d’intégration. L’un de ses premiers degrés d’intégration est appelé la zone de libre-échange (Elsa Tapsoba, Intégration économique et normes internationales du travail en Afrique de l’Ouest (UEMOA) p.18). Celle-ci correspond à la zone dans laquelle est assurée l’abolition des droits de douane et des barrières non tarifaires entre les pays membres d’une communauté avec toutefois une indépendance des politiques tarifaires extérieures. Il existe plusieurs zones de libre-échange à travers le monde telles que L’Accord de Libre Échange Nord-Américain, le MERCOSUR,Partenariat Économique Régional Global (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement en anglais) et la liste n’est pas exhaustive.