Symposium Posts

Notre propos entend déconstruire le narratif sur la responsabilité des entreprises multinationales porté par les vainqueurs de l’ordre international économique établi depuis la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Nous entendons ainsi mettre en lumière les rapports dominants/dominés, pour ne pas dire les nouveaux rapports coloniaux, déterminant la distribution de la justice dans cet ordre. Il va s’agir plus précisément d’identifier les logiques sous-tendant la justice pour les victimes des multinationales françaises dans les États d’Afrique noire francophone à l’aune du Point de contact national de la France pour les Principes directeurs de l’OCDE à l’intention des entreprises multinationales (ci-après PCN)

This symposium aims to encourage a more systematic and critical scholarly engagement with the delocalization of justice in BHR cases involving harms suffered in African states, and the Global South more broadly. It is our contention that until now, with some notable exceptions, scholarly debates in the BHR sphere have insufficiently focused on the justification for, effectiveness of, and alternatives to this uprooting strategy. Yet, this delocalization lies at the heart of many legal processes and regulatory mechanisms aimed at delivering justice (or corporate accountability) in the Global North for harms that occurred in the Global South. Interrogating this delocalization, and imagining alternative strategies that would enable local populations to gain greater agency through local political and legal processes, should be at the core of scholarship and activism in the BHR field.

Enforcement of intellectual property rights in Africa is not always a straightforward task. Plans crafted with reference only to enforcement in developed countries will not be a perfect fit to the African situation. Still, there are possible solutions to the issue of counterfeiting and piracy in Africa. Protective mechanisms are a reality. Passionate professionals both within the government and among law practitioners are eager to learn and for the current system to evolve into one which is efficient, and which adequately protect the African consumer from the dangers of counterfeiting. Our final word of advice to right holders would therefore be to surround yourself with professionals who know the continent and who will be able to craft the best possible strategy aligned with expectations and budget.

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) enforcement in Africa holds the power to influence the extent to which foreign and local entities and individuals will register IPRs within and across African borders. Therefore, the book entitled Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2020), is a timely publication which provides key insights pertaining to IPRs enforcement.

The preparation of a book like Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2020), is a task that is both Herculean as well as Sisyphean. Herculean, because, with nearly 60 separate jurisdictions to cover, the enormity of the task cannot be overstated. Sisyphean, though, due to the impossibility for a book of this nature to be up to date and accurate; even before it is published, laws and situations will likely have changed in one or several jurisdictions. These two factors were clearly on the minds of the authors.

The book, Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2020), comes at a timely moment when the African continent is in a very critical stage of pursuing sustainable economic growth. Intellectual property rights have been prioritised continentally, regionally and at domestic levels as being a key part of this desired growth.

In Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2020), Marius Schneider and Vanessa Ferguson have not only given good exposition on the IP regime in all 54 African countries but have also taught us social studies on the nations of Africa. Some of this information seems far in history but one can blame the authors, as sourcing information and statistics on African countries can be a herculean task. They have done very well in this regard!

Gray and Gills (2016) view South-south cooperation (SSC) as an organising concept and a set of practices in pursuit of historical changes through a vision of mutual benefit and solidarity among the disadvantaged of the world system. From this perspective, SSC has become increasingly important as a means for countries within the global south axis to share knowledge, experience, know-how and solutions. In forging these interactions between South-South countries, "horizontality" is pivotal for conveying ideas of trust, mutual benefit and equity among cooperating countries. There has been a longstanding relationship between Africa and the Caribbean, with the two regions historically collaborating in areas of mutual interest at the bilateral, regional and multilateral levels. This partnership has been renewed over time in keeping with changes in the global political economy. However, while these states continue to cooperate in multiple fora in relation to different issues, economic activity and trade between them remain negligible. This paper argues that there is potential to enhance integration between these two regions by mainstreaming trade relations through a deliberate effort by related governments via SSC.

The Caribbean and Africa are unique and similar in their pluri-ethnic composition and shared history. They may have more in common than any other geopolitical regions in the world. They have even more reason to strengthen and deepen political and cultural ties, not least because the Caribbean is historically a major location of the African diaspora, and much of Caribbean history is steeped in the African "soul" and culture. This should be seen as a central element in their global repositioning strategies, specifically within the context of the OACPs.

This article examines the EPAs negotiating process in select ACP countries to highlight the fragmentation and dilution of ACP countries' negotiating positions. It outlines how the rigorous negotiation processes whittled down the ACP countries offensive interests and ultimately led to the hesitation by several ACP states to ratify the EPAs. The article concludes that EPAs are one of the factors that explain the low trade volumes between African and Caribbean countries.