THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG

ans have been slammed on those species that are thought to be threatened by the bio-
trading. 79
Other trade measures used to foster conservation efforts include export restrictions and
quarantines to regulate the outflow of species. Penal sanctions have also been devised as
measures that can achieve this feat. Such penal sanctions include use of fines for the wasteful
use of natural resources, illegal trafficking of banned animal and other biodiversity species. 80
In Kenya for instance, the Kenya Wildlife Authority outlawed the trade in a number of
biodiversity species. It slapped a ban on the trade in ivory and rhino horns among other
items. 81 However, the reliance on penal sanctions has proved somewhat an ineffective tool to
ensure compliance with standards put in place. Specific sanctions have failed to achieve the
desired goals. Paradoxically, the same countries have adopted some of the international
instruments that they once denounced. Kenya Wildlife Authority, for instance, adopted the
provisions of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), by banning
all game hunting and revoking all licenses to trade in wildlife products. 82
The African notion
The African notion on biodiversity emanates from the 1968 Convention on Biodiversity. This
was after the independence wave that swept across the African continent in the 1960s. Many
of the African countries felt the need for new conservation initiatives to provide a basis for
national legislations as well as to coordinate conservation across frontiers. The 1968 African
convention was negotiated under the auspices of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). 83
African Countries under the then OAU referred to the old colonial regimes relating to
biodiversity as predatory arrangements for privatization of natural resources. The framers of
the African notion grounded their argument in the fact that colonial laws relating to
biodiversity conservation were crafted basing on western conservation ethics that did not
focus on integrated management principles. The colonial laws failed to recognize the varying
needs of the people living in, or near the protected areas. 84
The OAU called for the adoption of an African convention harmonizing these actions herein
referred to as the African notion for biodiversity. The essence was to develop a model of
legislation on community rights and access to biological resources to ensure the continuing
control, by local communities, of their natural resources, knowledge, and technologies. 85 It
was envisioned that local communities keep regenerating natural resources, knowledge and
79 Bourgasser,K.S. 2000. Bio-Prospecting on Public Lands: Should Private companies Compensate
Governments for Use of Public Land Resources. Journal of Law and Policy 8: 481-541.
80 RSA. 1997. White Paper on the conservation and sustainable use of South African Biodiversity. Government
Gazette 385 No.18163.
81 The Kenya Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, Cap 37 of the Laws of Kenya.
82 Ibid.
83 The OAU 1968 African Convention. Article II.
84 The OAU 1968 African Convention. Article X(I).
85 Kamari-Mbote, P. 2002. Biological Diversity Management in Africa in the Run-up to the WSSD. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers Limited.
20