Tag: afcfta

Introduction

The first half of 2026 has marked a significant phase in the evolution of intellectual property (IP) governance across Africa. Nigeria commenced the implementation phase of its National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS); the African Union adopted eight Annexes to the Protocol on Intellectual Property Rights under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA); and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) established its first office in Sub-Saharan Africa in Abuja.

Taken together, these developments demonstrate an increasing shift from policy formulation to institutional implementation. They also reflect a growing recognition of intellectual property as an economic asset capable of supporting innovation, investment, creative industries and cross-border trade.

This briefing highlights key developments affecting Nigeria, West Africa and the broader African continent between January and May 2026. It draws principally from official publications of WIPO, the African Union, ARIPO, the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) and other authoritative sources. Its objective is not merely to catalogue events, but to identify their practical implications for businesses, rights holders, investors and policymakers.

I. Nigeria: From Policy Design to Full-Scale Execution

A. The NIPPS: Nigeria’s First Unified IP Framework

Nigeria’s National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS) approved by the Federal Executive Council on 6 November 2025 and formally launched in December of last year entered its critical implementation phase in January 2026. The NIPPS represents the first time Nigeria has adopted a unified national framework treating intellectual property as a strategic economic asset rather than a technical legal matter confined to practitioners and creators.

Critically, the Federal Government in January 2026 inaugurated two key institutional bodies to drive execution: an Inter-Ministerial Steering Committee and an Inter-Agency Coordination Group. These bodies are tasked with coordinating action across government agencies, monitoring implementation progress, and aligning the NIPPS rollout with Nigeria’s broader obligations under the AfCFTA Intellectual Property Protocol.

The NIPPS is a joint undertaking  of the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment; the Ministry of Arts, Culture and the Creative Economy; and the Ministry of Justice. It was developed through a WIPO-supported, multi-year, multi-stakeholder process involving over 200 contributors from government, the private sector, academia, and development partners. Its primary objectives encompass strengthening legal and institutional frameworks for IP administration, enhancing enforcement mechanisms, promoting technology transfer and commercialization, and building human resource capacity.

The Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment, Dr. Jumoke Oduwole, has stated that NIPPS reforms are intended to help Nigeria capture real value in its creative economy, which is being primed to contribute an ambitious $100 billion to GDP by 2030 — underscoring the scale of economic ambition behind the policy.

A particularly significant institutional proposal within the NIPPS is the establishment of a Nigerian Intellectual Property Commission (NIPC) as a central, high-level coordinating body, alongside a possible Nigerian Industrial Property Office (NIPO) to consolidate the Patents and Designs Registry and the Trade Marks Registry under a single administrative structure. The NIPPS also mandates the creation of a specialized Industrial Property Tribunal, a quasi-judicial fast track to bypass congested Federal High Courts and resolve technical IP disputes, such as trademark squatting, software algorithm infringements, and fashion design copying, within months rather than years.

For rights holders and businesses, the implications are immediate and structural. IP portfolios built under the old fragmented framework will need to be reviewed against the emerging unified standards. Businesses operating in Nigeria’s technology, creative, and agri-food sectors should treat NIPPS implementation not as a background regulatory development but as a strategic inflection point requiring proactive planning.

B. The NCC’s Enforcement Escalation: Digital Piracy, Collective Licensing, and Sector Priorities

The Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) has substantially escalated enforcement activity in the first half of 2026, consistent with its mandate under the NIPPS and the Copyright Act 2022. Its Director-General, Dr. John Asein, has publicly described piracy as “serious economic sabotage” that undermines creators and the broader creative industry.

Key enforcement developments during this period include the following:

1. The NCC announced plans to intensify enforcement against illegal streaming, cable piracy, and unauthorized public exhibitions using modern regulatory tools, with particular attention to the Nollywood film industry, the music sector, and sports broadcast rights.
2. The Commission destroyed pirated books valued at approximately ₦141.5 million, seized during enforcement operations across Ogun and Oyo States over the preceding three years, sending an unambiguous signal that physical IP piracy carries real consequences. The Nigerian Publishers Association supported the action, noting the devastating economic impact of book piracy on authors, publishers, and government revenue.
3. The NCC called for stronger collaboration with the Nigerian Police Force and security agencies to intensify anti-piracy operations, framing copyright enforcement as a matter of national economic security.

The Commission also introduced the Collective Management Regulations 2025, a significant regulatory instrument that introduces transparency requirements for collecting societies, streamlines copyright licensing procedures, and establishes a dispute resolution mechanism for rights-related disagreements. These regulations directly affect the operational frameworks of collecting societies such as the Musical Copyright Society Nigeria (MCSN), Audio Visual Rights Society of Nigeria (AVRS), Reproduction Rights Society of Nigeria (REPRONIG) and have immediate implications for music film distributors, broadcasting organizations, streaming platforms, and event promoters who rely on blanket licenses as well as authors and publishers of text and image-based works.

For platforms hosting or distributing content in Nigeria, the practical implication is unambiguous: voluntary compliance with licensing requirements is no longer a matter of discretion. Active enforcement has arrived, and the combination of NCC’s expanded regulatory tools and criminal prosecution capability under the Copyright Act 2022 means that liability exposure for platforms has materially increased.

C. WIPO Opens First Sub-Saharan African Office in Abuja

One of the most consequential structural developments for Nigeria’s IP ecosystem in 2026 is the establishment of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Nigeria Office in Abuja, the first WIPO office to be established anywhere in Sub-Saharan Africa. This development, formalized in June 2026, positions Nigeria as the primary continental gateway for WIPO’s growing engagement with Sub-Saharan Africa’s innovation and creative economy.

Nigeria’s Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Dr. Bosun Tijani, described the development as “a major endorsement of Nigeria’s growing influence in global innovation, technology, and the creative economy sectors.” The office is one of only seven WIPO country offices worldwide, a distinction that reflects both Nigeria’s strategic importance to global IP governance and the international community’s confidence in the country’s innovation trajectory.

The inauguration was accompanied by a high-level roundtable on accelerating Nigeria’s innovation ecosystem, at which participants agreed that effective IP protection must be complemented by strong commercialization structures to help innovators, researchers, and entrepreneurs convert ideas into globally competitive products and services. The United Nations Resident Coordinator in Nigeria, Mohamed Malick Fall, described the office as timely, noting that robust IP systems are essential to unlocking Africa’s vast creative and innovation potential, particularly among young people and women.

The NCC and WIPO have separately reaffirmed their commitment to a co-administered Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) programme aimed at enabling more copyright disputes to be settled through mediation, in order to reduce the burden on the Federal High Court and providing faster, more cost-effective resolution for creators and rights-holders. This development is particularly significant for individual creators, small enterprises, and collecting societies whose access to litigation is constrained by cost and delay.

D. Judicial Developments and Copyright Principles

The Federal High Court continued to clarify important aspects of Nigerian copyright jurisprudence during the period under review.

One of the central principles reaffirmed by the courts is the distinction between ideas and their expression. Section 3 of the Copyright Act 2022 excludes ideas, procedures, methods and concepts from copyright protection. Copyright subsists only in the original expression of those ideas.

This principle is well established in common-law jurisdictions. In University of London Press Ltd v University Tutorial Press Ltd , Peterson J observed that originality lies not in novelty of ideas but in the expression resulting from the author’s skill, labour and judgment.

In Walls and Gates Ltd v MTN Nigeria Communications Plc, the court reportedly dismissed claims founded upon the alleged use of a promotional concept relating to MTN’s twentieth anniversary campaign. The decision reinforces the orthodox principle that copyright does not protect abstract ideas or commercial concepts but only original expression fixed in a tangible form.

The case also illustrates another important principle: registration with the Nigerian Copyright Commission does not create copyright where none exists independently under the Copyright Act. Although registration serves evidential purposes, questions of originality, authorship, ownership and proof of infringement remain matters for judicial determination.

Accordingly, rights holders should maintain adequate records demonstrating creation, ownership and fixation of works. Registration is valuable, but it is not a substitute for substantive eligibility under the Copyright Act.

E. Civil Society and Legislative Reform Demands

On April 26, 2026 — World Intellectual Property Day — the Media Rights Agenda issued a formal call for comprehensive reform of Nigeria’s intellectual property laws. The organisation highlighted concerns relating to emerging technologies, artificial intelligence, trade secrets, databases and geographical indications.

Many of these concerns mirror issues identified in NIPPS and reinforce the likelihood of further legislative reform in the medium term. Businesses and professional bodies therefore have an opportunity to contribute to ongoing discussions concerning the future architecture of Nigerian intellectual property law.

II. The African Union and the AfCFTA IP Protocol: A Continental Turning Point

A. Eight Annexes Adopted — Operationalizing the Continental Framework

At the 39th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, held in Addis Ababa in February 2026, African leaders adopted eight Annexes to the AfCFTA Protocol on Intellectual Property Rights. This development marks the most significant advance in continental IP governance since the Protocol itself was adopted in February 2023.

The Annexes provide the detailed legal and procedural frameworks essential for the Protocol’s practical operation. They cover the full spectrum of IP categories: Marks (trademarks); Industrial Designs; Patents and Utility Models; New Plant Variety Protection; Geographical Indications; Copyright and Related Rights; and Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Genetic Resources.

The significance of this development cannot be overstated. Prior to the adoption of the Annexes, the AfCFTA IP Protocol represented a continental commitment without the machinery for delivery. The Annexes now provide that machinery, establishing procedures, clarifying obligations, and creating the basis for consistent enforcement and adjudication across participating African countries. As one commentary noted, the Annexes are expected to reduce the “spaghetti bowl” of overlapping regional IP agreements emanating from bodies such as ARIPO and OAPI, thereby streamlining compliance costs for businesses operating across multiple jurisdictions.

For businesses with multi-country African operations, the Annexes create both obligation and opportunity. The harmonized framework reduces the cost and complexity of protecting IP in multiple markets simultaneously, makes licensing and enforcement across borders more legally predictable, and reduces investment risk in innovation-intensive sectors. However, it also means that IP strategies designed exclusively around national frameworks may soon be insufficient — a portfolio built for Nigeria alone may not adequately protect assets deployed across the continental market.

The AfCFTA IP Protocol has now moved decisively from conceptual framework to implementation architecture. The question for businesses is no longer whether to engage with the continental IP system, but how to position ahead of its full operationalization.

It should be noted that the Annex dealing specifically with the establishment and mandate of an AfCFTA Intellectual Property Office has not yet received final approval, and the Protocol will only enter into force once ratified by at least 22 State Parties — a process that remains ongoing. Nevertheless, the direction of travel is clear, and the pace of progress has accelerated materially in 2026.

III. Regional IP Developments: ARIPO, OAPI, and Key National Updates

A. ARIPO: Revised Banjul Protocol Effective March 1, 2026

The African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) has adopted amendments to the Banjul Protocol on Marks and its Implementing Regulations, with the revised framework entering into force on March 1, 2026. The amendments apply not only to new filings but also to pending applications and existing registrations — requiring immediate attention from trademark practitioners with ARIPO portfolios.

The most operationally significant changes are as follows:

1. Designated states must now issue provisional refusals within six months from notification, replacing the previous nine-month period. This accelerates national-level examination and reduces the waiting time before legal certainty is achieved for applicants.
2. The Regulations introduce expanded provisions on electronic filing through the ARIPO online system, together with new prescribed forms in 2026 edition.
3. The amendments formally recognize priority based on display at officially recognized international exhibitions, provided the application is filed within six months of the exhibition date — creating an additional filing route for brands launching at trade fairs in ARIPO territories.

Brand owners and trademark agents should adjust opposition monitoring practices in light of the compressed provisional refusal timeline, and revisit filing strategies for ongoing or planned ARIPO applications.

B. OAPI Accedes to the Geneva Act of WIPO’s Lisbon Agreement

The Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OAPI) — the IP body serving 17 Francophone African nations, including Nigeria’s immediate neighbours of Benin, Niger, and Cameroon — strengthened its international governance standing by formally joining the Geneva Act of WIPO’s Lisbon Agreement. The Lisbon Agreement governs the international protection of appellations of origin and geographical indications, and OAPI’s accession extends these protections to the full range of its member states.

This development is particularly significant for businesses with products tied to origin in Francophone Africa, and for Nigerian exporters whose products enter OAPI member state markets. It signals that the GI protection architecture across West and Central Africa is being comprehensively upgraded, with direct implications for agri-food, craft, and cultural industries.

OAPI also co-hosted WIPO-supported workshops on technology transfer and innovation support for MSMEs during this period, building practical capacity across its membership.

C. Ghana: Trademark Registry Disruption and Recovery

Ghana’s Trademark Registry experienced a significant operational disruption in early 2026 when a nationwide strike declared by the Civil and Local Government Staff Association of Ghana (CLOGSAG) — commencing March 9, 2026 — suspended the processing and examination of trademark applications across government agencies including the Registry.

CLOGSAG called off the strike and directed its members to resume work on March 24, 2026, with normal operations expected to gradually restore. However, a backlog of applications accumulated during the disruption period, and negotiations between CLOGSAG and the Ghanaian government remain ongoing. This implies a resumption of industrial action cannot be excluded. Applicants with time-sensitive trademark filings in Ghana should maintain contingency plans and follow up directly with the Registry on pending applications.

D. South Africa: Full Transition to Electronic Patent Certificates

The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) of South Africa completed a significant modernization of its operational infrastructure in February 2026, transitioning exclusively to electronic patent certificates secured with quick-response (QR) verification codes. Physical patent certificates are no longer issued.

The move to digital certificates with embedded verification codes substantially reduces the risk of fraudulent patent documentation and enables instant authenticity verification by courts, customs authorities, licensing partners, and investors. South African patent holders and their legal representatives should update internal documentation systems to store and process e-certificates, particularly for cross-border licensing and enforcement transactions.

E. Algeria: Substantial Fee Increases at INAPI

The Algerian National Institute of Industrial Property (INAPI) published substantial official fee increases for trademark, patent, and industrial design filings in 2026, explicitly linked to recent Algerian IP law reforms. The increases are intended to better align administrative fees with actual processing costs and reflect the broader legislative reform underway in Algerian IP law.

Companies with significant Algerian IP portfolios — particularly those managing large trademark renewal programmes — should revise their IP cost projections accordingly. The fee increases may be substantial relative to prior years, and budget lines that predate 2026 are likely inaccurate.

F. Mozambique Ratifies the Marrakesh Treaty

Mozambique deposited its instrument of ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty with WIPO on January 27, 2026, with the Treaty entering into force in the country on April 27, 2026. The Marrakesh Treaty is designed to improve access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or otherwise print-disabled, by facilitating the creation and cross-border exchange of accessible format copies by authorized entities.

Publishers and content creators distributing works in Mozambique should understand the limitations this Treaty places on their exclusive rights with respect to accessible format production and distribution — a compliance consideration for educational and literary publishers in particular.

IV. The Road Ahead: Critical Opportunities and Strategic Imperatives

The foregoing developments collectively paint a picture of an African IP ecosystem in genuine structural transition. The pace of change is no longer incremental: it is systemic. For decision-makers, the following strategic imperatives emerge from this analysis.

1. Conduct a NIPPS-Aligned IP Audit Now

Nigeria’s NIPPS implementation will progressively introduce new standards, registration requirements, and enforcement expectations. Businesses operating across Nigeria’s technology, creative, and agri-food sectors should commission a comprehensive review of their existing IP portfolios against the emerging NIPPS framework, particularly with respect to software protection, geographical indications, and IP commercialization structures. The proposed Industrial Property Tribunal will create new adjudicative pathways; rights holders should ensure their IP is structured to take advantage of faster dispute resolution.

2. Recalibrate Digital Content Licensing in Nigeria

The NCC’s enforcement escalation is real and ongoing. Streaming platforms, music distributors, film aggregators, broadcasting organizations, and event promoters operating in Nigeria must ensure that all content licensing is current, documented, and compliant with the Collective Management Regulations 2025. The combination of active enforcement operations, criminal prosecution capability, and strengthened platform liability standards means that voluntary compliance is the only rational strategy.

3. Develop a Pan-African IP Strategy Informed by the AfCFTA Annexes

The adoption of eight AfCFTA IP Annexes transforms the landscape for businesses with multi-country African ambitions. IP strategies designed exclusively around national frameworks are increasingly inadequate. Decision-makers should engage specialist IP counsel to assess how their existing protection structures interact with the AfCFTA framework, identify gaps in cross-border coverage, and develop licensing and enforcement strategies calibrated to the continental market.

4. Update Filing Budgets for ARIPO and Algeria

The revised Banjul Protocol (effective March 1, 2026) and INAPI’s fee increases (Algeria) have materially changed the cost landscape for trademark and patent filings in these jurisdictions. IP managers and in-house counsel should update their budget projections immediately. Applications and renewals planned on pre-2026 assumptions may be inadequately resourced.

5. Prioritize Evidence Quality in Nigerian IP Disputes

The Federal High Court’s rulings in early 2026 have made unmistakably clear that the decisive factor in IP disputes is the quality of evidence — not the existence of registration. Businesses and practitioners involved in actual or anticipated IP litigation in Nigeria should audit their evidentiary foundations: documentation of creation, proof of originality, records of first use, and clear chain of title are essential. Registration remains advisable, but it is a starting point, not a conclusion.

6. Engage the Legislative Consultation Process

Nigeria’s IP legislative reform is imminent. Stakeholders with material interests in the outcomes — brand owners, technology companies, content creators, pharmaceutical companies, agri-businesses, and collecting societies — should engage the consultation process actively. The window to shape the architecture of Nigeria’s next-generation IP law is open, but it will not remain so indefinitely.

7. Register for the Africa IP Summit, Nairobi — November 2026

The 7th Africa IP Summit, themed “Mainstreaming Intellectual Property for Africa’s Trade, Industrial and Creative Economy Transformation,” is scheduled for November 11 to 13, 2026 in Nairobi, Kenya. The 2026 edition signals a deliberate shift from policy conversation to practical implementation strategy — focusing on technology transfer, enterprise development, and investment opportunities linked to IP. For decision-makers seeking to engage Africa’s IP policy architecture and build cross-border commercial relationships, this is the continent’s foremost convening platform. Registration is open.

Conclusion

The period from January to May 2026 has fundamentally altered the intellectual property environment across Nigeria, West Africa, and the African continent. Nigeria has moved from possessing a policy document to building the institutional machinery of a unified IP regime. The African continental framework has acquired operational annexes across the full spectrum of IP categories. WIPO has embedded itself in Sub-Saharan Africa with a permanent presence in Abuja. The courts are articulating sharper doctrinal clarity and enforcement at the NCC, in the Federal High Court, and at the continental level is unambiguously intensifying.

For the decision-maker who treats these developments as background noise, the risk is real: of being caught by enforcement action, of missing the window to shape legislation, of maintaining IP strategies that no longer fit the regulatory landscape, or of forfeiting the commercial advantages that a well-structured IP portfolio now offers in Nigeria and across Africa.

The message from this analysis is not merely that change is happening. It is that the pace and depth of change demand active, informed, and timely response. AEO Law Practice remains committed to providing the intelligence and advisory support that enables clients to navigate this landscape with clarity and confidence.

Author Adeola Osifeko LLB, BL, LLM, ACIS ABR. She can be reached on adeola@aeolawpractice.com

This briefing is prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal counsel on matters pertaining to their circumstances.

REFERENCES

Primary Legislation

1.  Copyright Act 2022 (Nigeria) No 26 of 2022.

2.  Patents and Designs Act (Nigeria) Cap P2 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

3.  Trade Marks Act (Nigeria) Cap T13 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

International Instruments

4.  Agreement Establishing the African Continental Free Trade Area (signed 21 March 2018, entered into force 30 May 2019).

5.  AfCFTA Protocol on Intellectual Property Rights (adopted by the AU Assembly at its 36th Ordinary Session, Addis Ababa, 18–19 February 2023).

6.  Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print-Disabled (adopted 27 June 2013, entered into force 30 September 2016) WIPO Doc VIP/DC/8.

Cases

7.  University of London Press Ltd v University Tutorial Press Ltd [1916] 2 Ch 601: Similar principles were affirmed in Donoghue v Allied Newspapers Ltd [1938] Ch 106 and Designer Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416.

8.  Walls and Gates Ltd & Anor v MTN Nigeria Communications PLC (Federal High Court, Lagos, judgment delivered on or around 8 January 2026

Institutional and Online Sources

9.  WIPO, ‘Nigeria’s Federal Executive Council Approves National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy’ (WIPO, 6 November 2025) <https://www.wipo.int/en/web/office-nigeria/w/news/2025/nigeria-s-federal-executive-council-approves-national-intellectual-property-policy-and-strategy&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

10. European IP Helpdesk, ‘Nigeria Launches National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy to Boost Innovation, Trade and Regional Competitiveness’ (European IP Helpdesk, 30 January 2026) <https://intellectual-property-helpdesk.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/nigeria-launches-national-intellectual-property-policy-and-strategy-boost-innovation-trade-and-2026-01-30_en&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

11. Abdu-Salaam Abbas & Co, ‘A Review of the National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS)’ (Mondaq, 18 February 2026) <https://www.mondaq.com/nigeria/trademark/1746226/a-review-of-the-national-intellectual-property-policy-and-strategy-nipps&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

12. TechPoint Africa, ‘Nigeria Approves Reforms to Boost Digital Trade and Protect Intellectual Property’ (TechPoint Africa, 9 November 2025) <https://techpoint.africa/news/nigeria-digital-trade-ip-reforms/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

13.  News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), ‘Nigeria Deepens Intellectual Property Partnership with WIPO’ (NAN, June 2026) <https://nannews.ng/nigeria-deepens-intellectual-property-partnership-with-wipo/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

14. Federal Ministry of Information and National Orientation, ‘Nigeria, WIPO Deepen Collaboration to Commercialise Creativity, Research’ (FMINO, June 2026) <https://fmino.gov.ng/nigeria-wipo-deepen-collaboration-to-commercialise-creativity-research/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

15. State House Abuja, ‘Nigeria, WIPO Deepen Collaboration to Commercialise Creativity, Research’ (State House, June 2026) <https://statehouse.gov.ng/nigeria-wipo-deepen-collaboration-to-commercialise-creativity-research/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

16. The Guardian (Nigeria), ‘NCC Unveils New Logo, Destroys N141.5 Million Pirated Books’ (The Guardian Nigeria, 17 December 2025) <https://guardian.ng/news/ncc-unveils-new-logo-destroys-n141-5-million-pirated-books/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

17. The Sun (Nigeria), ‘NCC Vows to Intensify Anti-Piracy War, Disrupt Illicit Networks’ (The Sun Nigeria, 24 April 2026) <https://thesun.ng/ncc-vows-to-intensify-anti-piracy-war-disrupt-illicit-networks/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

18. Collective Management Regulations 2025 (Nigeria), made pursuant to the Copyright Act 2022 ss 17–22.

19. African Union, ’39th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government’ (African Union, 14–15 February 2026) <https://au.int/en/newsevents/20260214/39th-ordinary-session-assembly&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

20 Salim Kim W, ‘Harmonizing Innovation: The Adoption of Annexes to the AfCFTA Protocol on Intellectual Property Rights at the 39th AU Summit’ (Medium, 17 February 2026) <https://medium.com/@kimsalim99/harmonizing-innovation-the-adoption-of-annexes-to-the-afcfta-protocol-on-intellectual-property-58175e5ba1cb&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

21. tralac Trade Law Centre, ‘AfCFTA Resources’ <https://www.tralac.org/afcfta-resources.html&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

22. Von Seidels, ‘AfCFTA: The Race for IP Protection in Africa is On’ (Von Seidels, 16 January 2026) <https://www.vonseidels.com/international-news/afcfta-the-race-for-ip-protection-in-africa-is-on&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

23. Von Seidels, ‘The 2026 Edition of ARIPO’s Banjul Protocol is Here: Understanding the New Amendments’ (Von Seidels, 17 February 2026) <https://www.vonseidels.com/international-news/the-2026-edition-of-aripos-banjul-protocol-is-here-understanding-the-new-amendments&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

24. Saba IP, ‘ARIPO: Trademark Prosecution Timelines Accelerated Under Revised Banjul Protocol’ (Saba IP, 23 February 2026) <https://www.sabaip.com/aripo-trademark-prosecution-timelines-accelerated-under-revised-banjul-protocol/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

26. Mondaq (South Africa), ‘ARIPO Approves Amendments to the Banjul Protocol on Marks’ (Mondaq, 2 March 2026) <https://www.mondaq.com/southafrica/trademark/1751526/aripo-approves-amendments-to-the-banjul-protocol-on-marks&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

27. IPLINK Asia, ‘Emerging IP: January 2026’ (IPLINK Asia, 8 February 2026) <https://www.iplink-asia.com/news-detail.php?id=1452&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

28. Adams & Adams, ‘ARIPO’s Overhauled Trade Mark System Goes Live on 1 March 2026’ (Adams & Adams, 18 February 2026) <https://www.adams.africa/aripo/aripos-overhauled-trade-mark-system-goes-live-on-1-march-2026/&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

29. ARIPO, Banjul Protocol on Marks (2026 Edition) <https://www.aripo.org&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

30. Novagraaf, ‘IP Protection on the African Continent: ARIPO Update’ (Novagraaf) <https://www.novagraaf.com/en/insights/ip-protection-african-continent-aripo-update&gt; accessed 20 June 2026.

31. Media Rights Agenda, ‘Statement on World Intellectual Property Day 2026’ (Media Rights Agenda, 26 April 2026), cited in S.P.A. Ajibade & Co (n 18).

32.  NCC, Guidelines on Copyright Registration (Nigerian Copyright Commission 2023).