EU must not deny its public the right to participate in GMO decision-making!

[Guest guest]

GMW: ACTION - EU must not deny its public the right to

participate in GMO decision-making!

" GM WATCH " <info

 

 

Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:17:06 GMT

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

 

EU must not deny its public the right to participate in GMO

decision-making!

 

 

 

FROM Mara Silina <mara.silina

 

Dear Friends,

 

The European Commission, the Biotech Industry and some European Union

(EU) countries, in particular France, do not want to provide the public

an adequate right to participate in decision-making related to GMO

activities, within the Aarhus Convention. Countries from Eastern Europe,

Caucus and Central Asia (EECCA), all Parties to the Aarhus Convention

(AC), have clearly expressed the need for a pan-European common approach

that grants the public with clear and equal rights to participate in

decision-making related to GMO activities throughout Europe. The lack of

adequate public participation provisions in the Aarhus Convention will

facilitate the entrance of GMOs without public scrutiny in the

Pan-European region, a situation favoured by the biotech industry and

major GMO

exporting countries.

 

The Aarhus Convention (AC), an international agreement adopted in 1998,

grants the public rights to access to information, public participation

and access to justice in environmental issues. The AC is a Convention

which covers Parties from the Pan-European region, including Europe,

Caucus, and Central Asia region (EECCA). All 25 European Union (EU)

Member

states and the European Community as such have signed the AC, and more

and more of them have already ratified.

 

1-4th February 2005 the Parties and Signatories of the AC met to

prepare the Second Meeting of the Parties of the Convention to be held in

Kazakhstan in May this year. Over 10 non-EU countries present from

Eastern

Europe, Caucus and Central Asia, reaffirmed the need for granting the

public in the region the right to participate in decisions related to

GMOs. Countries from this region believe in the need for a common

pan-European approach to public participation. The EU, despite having

in its

own legislation legally-binding provisions on public participation, was

unable to express any position, creating once again a de facto blocking

of the discussions.

 

Countries from the EECCA region have clearly expressed the will to

grant the public the right to participate in GMO related activities in an

international agreement that covers the whole European region, Caucus,

and Central Asia. These countries have expressed the desire to adopt an

amendment to the AC which guarantees such right. The EU must respect

and listen to their request, and support the adoption of such an

amendment. EU countries have already legally binding provisions on

GMOs in the

EU, and do not have substantial reasons to deny countries from the

EECCA region similar rights. The EU must not let it happen that the

pressure from biotech industry and pro biotech countries blocks the

progress

in the AC.

 

The EU will be discussing this topic at the next Council meeting on

March 10th. The EU must take a position, which is in line with the

demands

of the EECCA countries, so that in May, in Kazakhstan a comprehensive

amendment can be adopted. If the EU adopts a position against the will

of those countries, or fails to adopt any position, it will send an

extremely damaging signal to the EECCA region. If this occurs the EU will

have betrayed the public of the pan-European region.

 

We urge you to send letters to your National Ministers urgently before

the 9th of March and ask them to support a position in line with the

demand of EECCAs countries. Please find attached a sample letter, and a

briefing with more details.

 

Sincerely,

Mara Silina

 

Mara SILINA - Enlargement Co-ordinator

European Environmental Bureau/EEB

Federation of Environmental Citizens Organisations and

Coordinator Public Participation Campaign

European ECO Forum

34, Boulevard de Waterloo,

B-1000 Brussels, Belgium

ph.:+32.2.289 13 05; fax:+32.2.289 10 99

E-mail: mara.silina

http://www.eeb.org

http://www.participate.org

------

February 2005

 

ECOFORUM BRIEFING PAPER

 

EU MUST NOT DENY THE PUBLIC ITS RIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE IN GMO DECISION

MAKING

 

The European Commission, the Biotech Industry and some European Union

(EU) countries, in particular France, do not want to provide the public

an adequate right to participate in decision-making related to GMO

activities, within the Aarhus Convention. Countries from Eastern Europe,

Caucus and Central Asia, all Parties to the Aarhus Convention (AC), have

clearly expressed the need for a pan-European common approach that

grants the public with clear and equal rights to participate in

decision-making related to GMO activities throughout Europe. The lack

of adequate

public participation provisions in the Aarhus Convention will

facilitate the entrance of GMOs without public scrutiny in the

Pan-European

region, a situation favoured by the biotech industry and major GMO

exporting countries.

 

1. EECCA call for the right of the public to participate in GMO

decision-making

 

The Aarhus Convention (AC), an international agreement adopted in 1998,

grants the public rights to access to information, public participation

and access to justice in environmental issues. The AC is a Convention

which covers Parties from the Pan-European region, including Europe,

Caucus, and Central Asia region (EECCA). All 25 European Union (EU)

Member

states and the European Community as such have signed the AC, and more

and more of them have already ratified.

 

1-4th February 2005 the Parties and Signatories of the AC met to

prepare the Second Meeting of the Parties of the Convention to be held in

Kazakhstan in May this year. Over 10 non-EU countries present from

Eastern

Europe, Caucus and Central Asia, reaffirmed the need for granting the

public in the region the right to participate in decisions related to

GMOs. Countries from this region believe in the need for a common

pan-European approach to public participation. The EU, despite having

in its

own legislation legally-binding provisions on public participation, was

unable to express any position, creating once again a de facto blocking

of the discussions.

 

2. The need to solve the anomaly of the Aarhus Convention

 

The Aarhus Convention is a UN legal instrument whose objective is to

guarantee the public rights of access to information, participation in

decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters. The

Aarhus Convention has a set of comprehensive provisions on public

participation which apply to a broad range of activities which can

have an

impact on the environment in the sectors of energy, production and

processing of metals, mineral industry, chemical industry, waste

management,

etc.

 

Activities involving GMOs were not included in the list of activities,

which are subject to the public participation requirements of the AC,

and were deferred to national legislation. This exclusion was an

anomaly, and that is why immediately after the adoption of the AC in

1998 the

Signatories requested that the First Meeting of the Parties further

develop the application of the Convention in the field of GMOs. A Task

Force on GMOs was created in 2000, followed by a Working Group in 2001,

and a second Working Group in 2002.

 

3. The situation today: EU de facto blocks the discussion

 

For four years Parties and Signatories to the Convention, NGOs and

industry have been discussing how to solve this anomaly. A big

majority of

countries from Eastern Europe, Caucus and Central Asia have manifested

unequivocally since 2001 the desire to establish in the framework of

the Aarhus Convention a legally binding provision that will grant the

public the right to participate in decisions related to GMO activities.

The articulated this in a precise text for an amendment to the AC. Other

countries like Norway have also expressed clearly the support to that

approach. In contrast, in 4 years the EU has never managed to back any

position, due to internal division and an almost iron discipline in the

EU-co-ordination, preventing that individual Member states would choose

sides in the public debate under the Convention. France is the only

country that did not stick with this discipline in the February meeting,

and has made it very clear that it opposes the AC to arrange any

adequate public participation obligation related to GMOs.

 

Over four years of discussions should have granted the EU enough time

to take a position. Despite some EU countries have manifested their

flexibility and constructive spirit, the attitude of the EU commission

and

some EU countries, in particular France has prevented any progress and

created a de facto block in the discussions. The European Commission

and France have always opposed the position of the EECCA countries. The

biotech industry, which is opposing binding obligations for public

participation on GMOs, and which is actively present at the meetings, has

openly supported the views of the European Commission and France.

 

4. Why the European Commission and some EU member States are opposing

the right of the public to participate in GMO decision-making within the

context of the AC?

 

The European Commission is subject of huge pressure from the biotech

industry and major GMO exporting countries over the GMO situation in

Europe. The strong opposition of the European Commission to any positive

outcome of the AC process has a strong political nature within the bigger

debate surrounding the Cartagena Protocol and the WTO case currently

ongoing on the EU moratorium and the national bans. The European

Commission wants to avoid further dispute with the US and other

pro-biotech

countries, and does not want to extend the issue of GMOs in any other

international forum. This despite the general agreement of which they

were

part, in October 2002, to develop a legally binding solution for GMO

decisionmaking under the Aarhus Convention.

 

The European Commission and the French delegation have constantly been

arguing that any comprehensive legislation on public participation on

GMOs within Aarhus will damage the Biosafety Protocol process.

Apparently there has been pressure from the biotech industry and some

of the

major GMO exporters that if the public participation requirements of the

Aarhus Convention are extended to the GMO activities, pro-biotech

countries will consider it a huge affront that will make the current

discussions on the implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, and the

GMO WTO

case even worse for the EU. It has even been mentioned that the Aarhus

issue could complicate the Biosafety Protocol ratification of major GMO

exporters like Canada.

 

This argumentation about the incompatibility between the AC and the

Biosafety Protocol is false and has been artificially built. A letter

from

Mr. Zedan, the Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, to

the Secretary of the Aarhus Convention completely clarifies the issue,

and underlines the mutually supportive character of both international

instruments. Mr. Zedan described " the important role that the Aarhus

Convention was playing in promoting public participation in

decision-making on GMOs and agreed that the Cartagena Protocol and the

Aarhus

Convention could complement each other and be mutually supportive " . The

Secretary of the Convention went even further expressing his " belief that

the outcome of the processes under the Aarhus Convention, in particular

discussions in the Working Group on GMOs, would contribute significantly

to the consideration of the subject matter under the Cartagena

Protocol " .

 

5. The way forward

 

Countries from the EECCA region have clearly expressed the will to

grant the public the right to participate in GMO related activities in an

international agreement that covers the whole European region, Caucus,

and Central Asia. These countries have expressed the desire to adopt an

amendment to the AC which guarantees such right. The EU must respect

and listen to their request, and support the adoption of such an

amendment. EU countries have already legally binding provisions on

GMOs in the

EU, and do not have substantial reasons to deny countries from the

EECCA region similar rights. The EU must not let it happen that the

pressure from biotech industry and pro biotech countries blocks the

progress

in the AC.

 

The EU will be discussing this topic at the next Council meeting on

March 10th. The EU must take a position, which is in line with the

demands

of the EECCA countries, so that in May, in Kazakhstan a comprehensive

amendment can be adopted. If the EU adopts a position against the will

of those countries, or fails to adopt any position, it will send an

extremely damaging signal to the EECCA region. If this occurs the EU will

have betrayed the public of the pan-European region.

 

Ecoforum contact persons

 

Juan Lopez, ECO Forum GMO expert

 

John Hontelez, Secretary General European Environmental Bureau

 

Serhiy Vykhryst, ECO Forum GMO expert

 

 

 

 

--------