PROTECTING AFRICAN TRADITIONAL TEXTILES UNDER GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS LAW: THE CASE OF TOGHU, NDOP AND KENTE — A POLITICAL ECONOMY PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

African traditional textiles, including Toghu and Ndop from Cameroon and Kente from Ghana, face unprecedented cultural appropriation and economic devaluation by global fast-fashion enterprises. This article evaluates whether Geographical Indications (GI) law offers a more robust political and legal protection framework than conventional, individualistic copyright and trademark regimes. Utilizing a political economy lens, this paper analyzes the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and the OAPI Bangui Agreement as primary regulatory instruments. It argues that GI, as a collective right explicitly bound to geographic origin and traditional craftsmanship, aligns seamlessly with the communal ownership models of indigenous knowledge. Ultimately, the article recommends a fast-tracked GI registration pathway for Cameroonian textiles to strategically leverage emerging trade opportunities within the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

Keywords: Geographical Indications, Toghu, Ndop, Traditional Knowledge, OAPI, TRIPS, AfCFTA, Cultural Appropriation

I. Introduction

Traditional textiles in Africa transcend mere aesthetic appeal; they function as potent markers of political identity, institutional chieftaincy, and communal governance (Scafidi, 2005). Within the Northwest and Southwest Regions of Cameroon, Toghu—the intricately embroidered regalia of the Bamenda Grassfields—and Ndop—the geometric, indigo resist-dyed fabric of the Bamoun Kingdom—signify deeply entrenched systems of royalty and socio-political status. Despite their cultural sanctity, these designs are increasingly replicated by transnational fast-fashion brands without community authorization, acknowledgment, or economic compensation (World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO], 2023).

Conventional intellectual property (IP) regimes have historically sought to protect fashion through trademark and copyright laws. However, this individualistic property model remains fundamentally incompatible with communally generated cultural expressions (Scafidi, 2007). This misalignment underscores a fundamental political question: who owns culture? This article contends that Geographical Indications (GI), as codified under the international TRIPS Agreement (TRIPS Agreement, 1994, Art. 22), provide a politically equitable and legally superior mechanism for protecting collective heritage.

II. Background of the Study

The socio-political history of these textiles reflects centuries of institutional governance. The Bamenda Grassfields have produced Toghu for over two hundred years, where it has served as an elite symbol of royalty among the Tikar peoples. Similarly, Ndop originates from the historic Bamoun Kingdom of Foumban, utilizing complex indigo resist-dye methodologies sustained primarily through intergenerational women’s cooperatives. In Ghana, Kente cloth emerged from the Asante Kingdom in the 17th century as a sacred ceremonial garment. Historically, the integrity of these textiles was strictly enforced via customary law; for instance, specific Toghu patterns and geometric Ndop motifs were restricted exclusively to Fons (traditional rulers) and designated nobility.

Colonial fragmentation severely disrupted these customary enforcement mechanisms. Following independence, Cameroon joined the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) in 1962. However, the resulting legal frameworks disproportionately prioritized Western-centric trademarks over communal traditional knowledge systems. Consequently, contemporary global markets are flooded with machine-printed, low-quality counterfeit Toghu garments retailing for approximately $20 USD.

By contrast, an authentic, hand-embroidered Toghu produced by artisans in Buea commands upwards of 150,000 FCFA and requires three weeks of intensive labor. This economic asymmetry directly immiserates rural women weavers who depend on textile production for economic survival. While domestic statutory measures like Cameroon Law No. 2021/024 on Cultural Heritage exist, they lack cross-border IP enforcement capabilities. Consequently, international GI registration emerges as the vital missing link.

III. Conceptual Framework

Scafidi (2005) conceptualizes cultural appropriation as the unauthorized extraction of intellectual property, traditional knowledge, or cultural expressions from a historically marginalized community by a dominant global actor. Within international trade, fashion occupies a highly vulnerable space because United States and Commonwealth common-law traditions offer minimal statutory protection for utilitarian clothing designs (Scafidi, 2007). Furthermore, standard trademark laws only secure brand logos rather than the underlying cultural motifs themselves (Cornish, 2019). Analyzed through a political economy lens, this legal vacuum facilitates an extractive relationship wherein Western and Asian manufacturing hubs appropriate local African cultural capital while completely bypassing local value chains.

IV. Legal and Institutional Frameworks

Against this background, three frameworks are relevant to the protection of traditional textiles: the international, the regional, and the comparative.

A. International Framework: The TRIPS Agreement

The World Trade Organization (WTO) operationalizes GIs under the TRIPS Agreement as “indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin” (TRIPS Agreement, 1994, Art. 22.1). While Article 23 mandates heightened protection for wines and spirits, developing nations continue to lobby extensively for the extension of this absolute protection to traditional textiles and artisanal crafts.

B. Regional Framework: The OAPI Bangui Agreement

As an OAPI member state, Cameroon is bound by the Bangui Agreement, whose Annex VI specifically regulates the protection of Geographical Indications (OAPI, 1999). Despite the structural robustness of this regional mechanism, it remains severely underutilized. As of 2026, Cameroon possesses only three registered GIs: Penja Pepper, Oku White Honey, and Bafang Pepper. To date, no traditional Cameroonian textile has achieved registration status under this framework.

C. Comparative Framework: The Indian GI Model

India offers a highly successful empirical blueprint for developing nations. Under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act (1999), India has secured protection for over 400 distinct cultural assets, including the globally renowned Kanchipuram Silk Saree. Longitudinal socioeconomic studies indicate that formal GI registration has yielded a 30% increase in average weaver household incomes by eliminating counterfeit market competitors (WIPO, 2024).

V. Political Economy Analysis: Why GI Is a Strategic Imperative

Having set out these frameworks, the question becomes why GI protection is a strategic imperative for Cameroon rather than merely one legal option among several. Three considerations stand out.

1. Alignment of Collective Rights with Indigenous Custom: Monopolistic intellectual property rights like copyright require a distinct, identifiable author and operate under strict temporal expirations, typically lasting 70 years post-mortem (Cornish, 2019). Because textiles like Toghu and Ndop are intergenerational and lack a singular historical author, they are inherently incompatible with this model. Conversely, GI status creates a perpetual, collective asset owned by the community as a legal entity, thereby matching the structural realities of African customary ownership.

2. State and Institutional Governance Failures: The exclusion of Toghu and Ndop from the OAPI registry stems from three primary institutional bottlenecks:

1. A systemic lack of technical legal literacy regarding intellectual property among traditional authorities (Fons) and weaving cooperatives in hubs like Buea.
2. The absence of a formalized, state-backed national database mapping traditional textile properties.
3. The centralized, highly bureaucratic nature of OAPI application procedures in Yaoundé, which operate exclusively in French and require prohibitive administrative fees.

3. Geo-Economic Stakes Under the AfCFTA: With the operationalization of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the absence of explicit GI protection poses a severe threat. Unprotected textiles face the risk of being economically displaced by cheap, automated textile imports entering the continent duty-free under rules-of-origin loopholes. Securing GI status creates a legally defensible trade barrier, transforming Toghu and Ndop into premium, authenticated “Made in Cameroon” global brands.

VI. Recommendations and Conclusion

To safeguard the socioeconomic future of Cameroon’s textile heritage, this paper advances four urgent policy recommendations:

1. Decentralization of OAPI Services: OAPI should establish an accessible, bilingual (English and French) GI documentation desk in Buea to support Anglophone artisan networks.
2. Legal Standing for Customary Institutions: The Ministry of Justice should amend domestic enforcement regulations to explicitly recognize Traditional Councils and local weaving cooperatives as legitimate collective applicants under Article 8 of the Bangui Agreement.
3. State-Sponsored Academic Mapping: The Ministry of Arts and Culture, in strategic partnership with the University of Buea, must allocate research financing to systematically document the historical geographical boundaries and specific technical standards of Toghu and Ndop production.
4. Customs Enforcement Mobilization: Border control authorities must be cross-trained to recognize and seize counterfeit, machine-printed imports imitating protected cultural motifs.

In conclusion, protecting African traditional textiles requires moving past outdated, individualized legal frameworks. By implementing a proactive, state-supported Geographical Indications strategy, Cameroon can shield its rich cultural economy from predatory globalization, ensuring that the material benefits of indigenous creativity return to the communities that kept them alive for generations.