Research declarations

Research declarations

Funding and sponsor involvement

This research was undertaken independently and received no external funding, grant, institutional sponsorship or financial support.

Competing interests

The submitting author, Yuvraj, is the founder and professionally associated with The Legal Gazette, the intended publication platform for this manuscript. Co-author Farinde Ayomide Abidemi previously completed a one-month internship with The Legal Gazette in April 2025. These professional associations are disclosed for transparency. Neither author declares any other competing financial or non-financial interests.

Author contributions

Yuvraj contributed to conceptualisation, research design, methodology, investigation, collection and analysis of legal materials, comparative legal analysis, drafting, revision and final approval of the manuscript. Farinde Ayomide Abidemi contributed as co-author by bringing an African perspective to the research, particularly in contextualising regional maritime governance, legal and institutional frameworks, and the implications of maritime trade and security for African states and regional economies.

Originality and related publications

This manuscript is based on and substantially revises the earlier article titled “Legal Framework Governing Maritime Trade in the Gulf of Guinea: Implications for Regional Economies and International Trade Relations,” published on 15 June 2025. The present manuscript has been substantially restructured, expanded and revised. It develops a more focused analysis of maritime jurisdiction, the distinction between piracy and armed robbery, international and regional legal obligations, the Yaoundé Architecture, comparative national implementation, maritime trade and coastal livelihoods. It also incorporates updated legal and institutional developments and a refined reform agenda. The earlier publication is expressly disclosed. The authors confirm that this manuscript is not presently under consideration for publication elsewhere, subject to confirmation by both authors.

Methods and legal currency

The article adopts a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology. It examines international conventions, treaty provisions, judgments of international tribunals, African regional instruments, national legislation, and official institutional reports and materials. The analysis draws on materials concerning UNCLOS, IMO, FAO, the African Union, the Yaoundé Architecture and selected national maritime laws.

Limitations

The study is principally doctrinal and comparative and does not include original interviews, fieldwork, surveys or statistical modelling. Its comparative coverage is selective and does not exhaust every Gulf of Guinea state's maritime legislation or enforcement practice. Reported maritime incidents and institutional statistics are used cautiously, recognising differences in reporting methodologies. Assertions concerning causation, economic costs and operational effectiveness are not presented as established without supporting empirical evidence.

Ethics and participant protections

This research involved documentary legal analysis of publicly accessible legislation, treaties, judicial decisions, scholarly literature and institutional reports. It did not involve human participants, interviews, surveys, private personal data or animal research. Institutional ethics approval, participant consent and related procedures were therefore not applicable.

Data and materials availability

The research relies on publicly accessible legal instruments, judicial decisions, official institutional documents, reports and scholarly literature, cited in the manuscript. No original empirical dataset was generated. Access to third-party materials remains subject to their respective copyright and licensing conditions.

AI and writing assistance

Generative AI tools were used for limited editorial, language, organisation and writing assistance during manuscript preparation.