|
|
ENVIRONMENT
GM Should Not Just be Dismissed, Nor Just Accepted
By Stephanie Nieuwoudt
CAPE TOWN, Jun 16 , 2009 (IPS) - After a protracted court battle of seven years, a small South African environmental
organisation won a major legal victory against the multinational agri-chemical and seed giant
Monsanto.
In a judgment in South Africa’s highest court, the Constitutional Court, this month, Judge
Albie Sachs overturned a previous ruling by a High Court judge that Biowatch had to pay
the costs of Monsanto and the government's department of agriculture.
This judgment followed after a number of court cases which started in 2002 when
Biowatch launched court proceedings in the High Court demanding access to information
about genetically modified (GM) crops produced by Monsanto. Biowatch is a non-profit
organisation that campaigns for sustainable agricultural practices.
‘‘Although Biowatch won the case, it was ordered that we pay all costs of both the
department of agriculture and Monsanto. It would have destroyed us if we had to pay the
costs,’’ Rose Williams, Biowatch director, told IPS.
In his judgment Sachs said ‘‘public interest litigation could be jeopardised by the severe
financial penalty that costs orders would impose on the organisations bringing these suits.
The protection of environmental rights will not only depend on the diligence of public
officials, but on the existence of a lively civil society willing to litigate in the public
interest.’’
Sachs also said that this case is ‘‘a matter of great interest to the legal profession, the
general public, and bodies concerned with public interest litigation’’.
An elated Williams responded by saying that, ‘‘the constitutional court victory proves that
constitutional rights of South Africans are being protected. We believe that there are a
number of health and environmental risks resulting from GM technology. The information
about these risks has to be made public.’’
Responding to the Constitutional Court judgment, Monsanto said: "Monsanto will naturally
abide by the court decision."
Mariam Mayet, director of the African Centre for Bio-safety, is inspired by the
Constitutional Court judgment because it ‘‘proves that the rule of law still applies’’. The
centre is a non-profit watchdog body that provides analysis on bio-safety, bio-piracy and
genetic engineering in Africa.
‘‘In the bio-safety realm, the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is in
dispute. There is no consensus that GM products are safe,’’ Mayet told IPS.
‘‘There are huge concerns that GM crops can contaminate agricultural biodiversity, lead to
alterations in the DNA structure of agricultural products and eventually replace them.
Monsanto has a monopoly. It controls the production and distribution of GM seeds
globally.
‘‘And if you use Monsanto seeds, you also have to buy their other products like herbicides
and pesticides. The organisation is extremely aggressive in lobbying provincial
governments. It is a powerful corporation with a lot of political influence.
"In South Africa the department of science and technology is in favour of GM technology
because the department receives huge amounts of money from foreign sources which is
poured into GM research.
‘‘Farmers are profit-driven and embrace the technology because there are short term
gains such as increased crop yields which save them labour costs. But they ignore the long
term impacts on health and the environment,’’ Mayet added.
In South Africa 60 percent of the maize crops is GM. But earlier this year, three white maize
hybrid crops failed in South Africa affecting an area of over 82 000 hectares in three
provinces. Some 280 out of 1,000 farmers who used those specific seeds found that there
was no kernel development.
In a statement, Monsanto claimed that extensive research proved that the problem was
caused by under-fertilisation in the laboratory, unsuitable weather conditions and
incorrect farming practices. The farmers who suffered losses were compensated by
Monsanto.
The global debate about GMs remains fierce, with a number of European countries
resisting GM. French president Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007 banned the cultivation of GM crops
and in the same year Monsanto was fined 15,000 euros by a French court for misleading
the public about the environmental impact of their herbicide called Roundup.
In South Africa Monsanto was forced by the Advertising Standards Authority of South
Africa to change the wording of an advertisement stating that GM products have never
caused any harm.
A number of researchers in this southern-most African country are arguing that GM could
have benefits but that more research is needed. In her book, ‘‘Invaded: The Biological
Invasion of South Africa’’ (published by Wits University Press), South African science writer
Leonie Joubert writes that controlling alien and invasive grasses is a tricky business.
The frequent use of genetically modified grains is fuelling the spread of herbicide-
resistant strains of crop grasses that makes control of the infestation even more
problematic.
She told IPS: ‘‘GM, unfortunately, has become as polarising an issue as nuclear power,
which I think is counterproductive. There is huge potential for GM to help us with feeding
the world's hungry and adapting to climate change.
‘‘My problem is that it's not regulated well enough and its rollout is mostly driven by
commercial interests, so you have whole lot of GM stuff getting out into the farming world
and potentially into the natural environment when it may not necessarily have been tested
sufficiently for safety, for example that the GM crops it won't hybridise with indigenous
varieties, that they won't become weedy or invasive themselves.
‘‘GM has to be treated on a case by case basis, not given blanket dismissal or blanket
acceptance," Joubert concluded.
Melodie McGeoch, a core team member of the Centre for Invasion Biology, a research hub
affiliated to the University of Stellenbosch near Cape Town, agreed: ‘‘It is important that
we raise the profile of the potential environmental and ecological risks of biotechnology.
Biotechnology can be safe but we have to ensure that it is sufficiently tested and
researched.
‘‘Steps have been taken to avoid potential risks, but we are not quite there yet. Many
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are released before there are sufficient systems in
place to assess their safety.’’
According to Biowatch’s Williams, herbicide and pesticide genes used in GM crops can also
potentially have harmful effects on human beings and animals. Biowatch points out that
South Africa has the dubious reputation of being the first country in the world to grow a
GM staple crop - white maize - commercially.
Consumers want to know why this was approved, how eating this maize affects their
health and why they are not able to exercise their right to choose non-GM foods through
labelling of food products. Williams maintains that not enough information is made public.
(Not for publication in Italy).
(END)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
What is RSS?
