Iraqi Government Urged to Revoke Cynical and Wicked Patent Law

[Guest guest]

8 Mar 2005 12:52:51 -0000

 

Iraqi Government Urged to Revoke " Cynical and Wicked " Patent Law

 

 

press-release

 

 

 

 

The Institute of Science in Society Science Society

Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

========================================================

 

 

ISIS Press Release 08/03/05

 

****************************

Iraqi Government Urged to Revoke

" Cynical and Wicked " Patent Law

****************************

 

 

Dr. Brian John

 

A fully referenced version of this article is posted on ISIS

members' website

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/full/GMiraqFull.php.

Details here http://www.i-sis.org.uk/membership.php

 

" Cynical and wicked " imposition on occupied Iraq

 

Aid agencies and NGOs across the globe have been reacting

with horror to the news that new legislation in Iraq was

carefully put in place last year by the United States that

will effectively bring the whole of the country's

agricultural sector under the control of trans-national

corporations. This spells disaster for the Iraqi government

and the country's farmers, paving the way for companies like

Monsanto and Syngenta to control the entire food chain from

planted seed to packaged food products [1].

 

The new Iraqi Government is now being urged to revoke Order

81, the offending piece of legislation signed and brought

into force by Paul Bremer, the Administrator of the

Coalition Provisional Authority, on 26th April 2004.

 

NGOs have described Order 81 as " cynical and wicked " , as the

section relating to the registration and protection of plant

varieties was slipped in almost as an appendage to an Order

dealing with patents, industrial design, disclosure of

information and integrated circuits [2].

 

The manner in which this Order was imposed on the people of

Iraq is an outrage in itself. There was virtually no Iraqi

input into the wording of the Order, as the country and its

people were on their knees following the Iraq War [3].

 

The Preamble to the Order justifies its provisions as

" necessary to improve the economic condition of the people

of Iraq " , desirable for " sustainable economic growth " , and

enabling Iraq to become " a full member of the international

trading system known as the WTO " . But when one looks at

paragraphs 51 to 79 of the Order, it is clear that they have

been designed simply to facilitate the takeover of Iraqi

agriculture by western biotechnology corporations.

 

It is not surprising that Order 81 was written as " enabling

legislation " for American corporate interests. The US

Agriculture Department, which aided Bremer in writing the

Order, was headed by ex-management of the huge US seed and

biotech companies, such as Monsanto and Cargill [4]. Ann

Veneman, who recently resigned as US Secretary of

Agriculture, had a long career working for large US

agribusinesses before going to work for the government. So

did Dan Amstutz who headed Iraq's agricultural

reconstruction.

 

The Order fits neatly into the US vision of future Iraqi

agriculture – an industrial agricultural system dependent on

a small number of cash crops, with large corporations

selling both chemical inputs and seeds.

 

It also arises naturally from the USAID programme in Iraq,

which unashamedly confirms the thesis that foreign aid

programmes are primarily " commercial opportunity " programmes

designed for the benefit of American companies [5].

 

Iraq's food crisis exploited

 

Iraq was once self-sufficient in agriculture and the world's

number one exporter of dates. It is the acknowledged centre

of origin of many cereal varieties that have been exported

and adapted worldwide.

 

Twenty seven percent of Iraq's total land area is suitable

for cultivation, over half of which is rain-fed while the

balance is irrigable. Wheat, barley, and chickpeas are the

primary staple crops, with wheat being traditionally the

most important crop. Before the First Iraq War, average

annual harvests were 1.4 million tonnes for cereals, 400 000

tonnes for roots and tubers, and 38 000 tonnes for pulses.

Over the past 20 years, Iraq's agricultural sector has

collapsed, and only half of the irrigable area is now

properly utilised [6]. It is not known how many of the

country's 600 000 farmers are still able to produce food.

Grain production during 2003 was less than (space) one-half

the grain production in 1990; andagricultural production has

been declining by an average of 2.6 % per year since.

 

Today more than 50 percent of the population is affected by

food insecurity. The Oil-For-Food Programme, while essential

to the humanitarian situation in Iraq, was a severe

disincentive to food production. Over half of Iraq's total

food requirement is imported, and a large portion of the

population is dependent upon externally-financed food

rations for survival. The World Food Programme (WFP) plays a

key role in coordinating the flow of food aid; and recently,

three million tonnes of wheat have been imported yearly,

mostly from Australia, to be distributed to Iraqis as part

of their food rations. Farm machinery and equipment are in

short supply amid water shortages, low technology uptake,

and a lack of profit incentive. The cost of food rations

provided to Iraqis is estimated at over $2 billion per year.

 

The Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) officials and the United

States Agency for International Development (USAID)

Agriculture Reconstruction and Development Program for Iraq

(ARDI) are continuing to implement a national wheat

production campaign, so as to reduce the dependency on aid.

Under the campaign, 1 500 tonnes of wheat seed has arrived

in Mosul. ARDI procured the seed to assist the MOA to

distribute high quality, certified seed to as many farmers

as possible.

 

Over 400 tonnes of this seed has already been distributed

and incorporated into high-profile " reconstruction and re-

education " programmes, and another 4 000 tonnes are on their

way. We have been unable to discover which varieties are

involved, who the seed owners are, and the terms under which

the seed stocks are being " donated " .

 

Foreign aid – a nice little earner

 

Order 81, like the other 99 orders brought into law at high

speed by Paul Bremer on behalf of the Coalitional

Provisional Authority, was conceived by the US

administration as part of the plan to install a " friendly

and compliant " , and essentially colonial regime in Iraq. The

Order explicitly states that its provisions are consistent

with Iraq's " transition from a non-transparent centrally

planned economy to a free market economy characterised by

sustainable economic growth through the establishment of a

dynamic private sector, and the need to enact institutional

and legal reforms to give it effect. " Pushing for these

" transitional reforms " in Iraq has been the USAID, which has

been implementing ARDI since October 2003. For this purpose,

a one-year US$5 million contract was granted to the US

consulting firm Development Alternatives, Inc, followed by a

further $96 million contract.

 

There has been great speculation in sections of the American

press about the fate of Iraqi oil sales revenues since the

invasion. Only a part of it seems to be accounted for, and

auditing procedures appear to have been corrupt. Some $9

billion worth of oil revenues seem to have vanished, and may

simply have been recycled by the US Administration as multi-

million dollar " aid " from the people of United States to the

people of Iraq [7].

 

ARDI claims it is rebuilding Iraq's farming sector, but its

real intention is to develop agribusiness opportunities for

western corporations. According to GRAIN and other NGOs,

" reconstruction " is not necessarily about rebuilding

domestic economies and capacities, but about helping

corporations approved by the occupying forces to capitalise

on market opportunities in Iraq. The legal framework laid

down by Bremer ensures that although US troops may leave

Iraq in the conceivable (forseeable) future, the US

domination of Iraq's economy will be sustained in law by one

hundred very convenient Orders.

 

Order 81

 

The critical part of Order 81 deals with plant variety

protection (PVP). Superficially, its purpose is to protect

the rights of those who develop new and improved plant

varieties [2], but it means that in future Iraqi farmers

will be forced to plant " protected " crop varieties defined

as new, distinct, uniform and stable. The new law makes a

very basic change to Iraqi " intellectual property " law, for

the first time recognizing the " ownership " of biologic

material and paving the way for the patenting of life forms.

It also opens the way for genetically modified crops to be

introduced into the country. Crucially, there are no special

provisions for GM crops - they are treated as no more novel

(and no more controversial) than new varieties developed

through conventional breeding programmes.

 

Where ownership of a crop is claimed, seed saving will be

banned, and royalties will have to be paid by the farmer to

the registered seed " owner " . Farmers will be required to

sign contracts relating to seed supply and, probably, to the

marketing of the harvest. Where GM crops are involved (and

possibly in other cases as well) they will also be required

to sign contracts for the purchase of herbicides,

insecticides and fertilisers.

 

Strictly, the new law does not prohibit saving seed from the

harvesting of traditional or long-established varieties that

are deemed to be " matters of common knowledge " [2, 4]. But

with Iraqi agriculture in a state of crisis, there are (gap)

critical seed shortages; and as mentioned earlier, the

" reconstruction " of the food supply system involves

(includes) a substantial involvement on the part of USAID

and other food donor organizations giving " high quality

seed " to farmers along with technical advice. It is

inevitable that that (most of this) seed comes from US

registered varieties, and that within a year or two,

philanthropy will be replaced by the collection of seed

royalties. In addition, Order 81 allows plant breeders to

claim ownership of old varieties (and to call them " new "

varieties) if they are the first to describe or characterize

them. They can then also claim ownership of related crops

that are " not clearly distinguishable from the protected

varieties " . The control of all protected varieties will last

20 years for field crops and 25 years for trees and vines.

Farmers who save seed or otherwise break their agreements,

and farmers unlucky enough to find the adventitious presence

of " registered varieties " in their fields, can be

prosecuted; or else their harvests, tools and buildings will

(may) be destroyed. Conversely, farmers will have no right

to claim compensation from the seed owners who, for example,

allow their GM crops to pollute organic crops and destroy

livelihoods in the process.

 

Head (Heads) I win, tails you lose

 

In the end, the Iraqi farmer will have two choices. He can

go it alone, and try to grow crops from seeds of

" traditional " crops that have become rare during decades of

war and sanctions; or he can sign up to the food aid /

agricultural programme and then buy seeds from companies

like Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta and Bayer. If he chooses the

first option he may be left out in the cold during the

reconstruction programme [1, 4]. If he chooses the second

option, after a period of free handouts and advice, he may

be trapped into a high-cost cash crop economy from which he

will find it impossible to escape. He will also be forced to

use seeds that appear to be high yielding but which may in

reality turn out to be ill adapted to his local environment;

so crop failures and even famine may follow.

 

It was some 10 000 years ago that the people of the fertile-

crescent, now Iraq, began saving seeds from wild grains and

planting them. That marked the beginnings of agriculture and

western civilization. The saving and sharing of seeds in

Iraq has always been a largely informal matter. Local

varieties of grain and legumes have been adapted to local

(space) conditions over the millennia, and are resistant to

extreme heat, drought and salinity. They are not only a

national treasure for Iraq but could well provide key

genetic resources for agriculture in other parts of the

world as global warming takes effect.

 

In 2002, FAO estimated that 97 percent of Iraqi farmers

still saved seed from their own stocks for replanting, or

purchased from local markets. Order 81 will put an end to

all that, and will brutally disregard the contributions

Iraqi farmers have made over hundreds of generations to the

development of important crops like wheat, barley, dates and

pulses. The new law, in allowing old varieties to be

genetically manipulated or otherwise modified and then

" registered " , amount to legalising the theft of inherited

intellectual property owned by traditional farmers, the loss

of farmers' freedoms, and the destruction of their food

sovereignty.

 

Germplasm held in trust?

 

In recognition of the unique " seed heritage " of Iraq,

traditional varieties have been saved as from the 1970s in

the country's national gene bank in Abu Ghraib outside

Baghdad. There is concern that most of these may have been

lost during the latter years of Saddam Hussein and in the

recent conflict. However, the Syria-based Consultative Group

on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centre and

the affiliated International Centre for Agricultural

Research in Dry Areas (ICARDA) still hold accessions of

several Iraqi varieties in the form of germplasm. These

collections comprise the agricultural heritage of Iraq and

they should now be repatriated. But CGIAR is reluctant to

give assurances on this [8]. Ominously, germplasm held by

international agricultural research centres belonging to the

CGIAR has been " leaked out " for research and development to

Northern scientists [1]. Such " biopiracy " is fuelled by an

IPR regime that ignores the prior art of the farmer and

grants sole rights to a breeder or researcher who claims to

have created something new from varieties made by

generations of indigenous farmers.

 

Wider implications

 

The US has now effectively declared a new war against the

Iraqi farmer. Order 81 also goes against the United Nations

Millennium Forum Declaration [9] which aspires to " move

towards economic reforms aimed at equity, in particular to

construct macroeconomic policies that combine growth with

the goal of human development and social justice; to prevent

the impoverishment of groups that have emerged from poverty

but are still vulnerable to social risks and exclusion; to

improve legislation on labour standards, including the

provision of a minimum legal wage and an effective social

system; and to restore people's control over primary

productive resources as a key strategy for poverty

eradication. " The signatories to the Declaration also seek

" to promote the use of indigenous crops and traditional

production skills to produce goods and services; to exempt

developing countries from implementing the WTO Trade-Related

Intellectual Property Rights Agreement and to take these

rights out of any new rounds of negotiations, ensuring that

no such new issues are introduced; and to examine and

regulate transnational corporations and the increasingly

negative influence of their trade on the environment. The

attempt by companies to patent life is ethically

unacceptable. "

 

Order 81 is also in clear contravention of the Convention on

Biological Diversity (CBD) in that it will increase chemical

use, reduce the number of planted crop varieties, accelerate

the trend towards monoculture, and decrease biodiversity

[10]. Biosecurity will also be negatively affected, and the

negative social effects will include population

displacement, rural decline and an extension of (poverty

and) urban slum dwelling. As to the Biosafety (Cartagena)

Protocol dealing with GMOs and their transboundary movement,

the Order is apparently designed to flout its aims and

objectives, as there is no mention of any regulation of GM

crop shipments, plantings, harvesting or export. It is no

coincidence that neither the US nor Iraq has signed the CBD

and the Cartagena Protocol.

 

The Food Aid Convention (cf Articles iii, viii and xiii)

states that GM food aid should only be offered and accepted

after recipient countries have discarded " conventional "

alternatives and non-GM food aid as non-options [11]. The

United States is a signatory to this Convention, but it has

been widely accused of violating it whenever it suits its

own interests to do so.

 

The Rio Declaration (1992) includes many progressive

principles, including the polluter-pays-principle (the

polluter bears the costs of pollution) or the precautionary

principle (carry out environmental assessments to identify

adverse impacts and eliminate any potential harms from a

project before it is started). It advocates that today's

development shall not undermine the resource base of future

generations and that developed countries bear a special

responsibility due to the pressure their societies place on

the global environment and the technologies and financial

resources they command [12]. These principles are all

flouted in Order 81.

 

The 2001 International Treaty on Plant Genetic resources for

Food and Agriculture (supported by the FAO and the

Convention on Biological Diversity) acknowledges that plant

genetic resources for food and agriculture are the raw

material indispensable for crop genetic improvement, whether

by means of farmers' selection, classical plant breeding or

modern biotechnologies, and are essential in adapting to

unpredictable environmental changes and future human needs;

that the past, present and future contributions of farmers

in all regions of the world, particularly those in centres

of origin and diversity, in conserving, improving and making

available these resources, is the basis of Farmers' Rights;

and that the rights recognized in this (the) Treaty to save,

use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed and other propagating

material, and to participate in decision-making regarding,

and in the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits

arising from, the use of plant genetic resources for food

and agriculture, are fundamental to the realization of

Farmers' Rights, as well as the promotion of Farmers' Rights

at national and international levels. Order 81 is in clear

violation of these principles.

 

Order 81 was supposedly drafted by the Coalition, and it

supposedly represented the consensus view of the Coalition

partners, including the UK and various other members of the

EU. The Order extends the patenting of life forms into the

area of crops and agriculture, in spite of a massive ethical

debate about this within Europe. It also treats GM varieties

as if they are no different from new " conventional "

varieties, which is in clear contravention of EU policy

[13]. Those who drafted Order 81 were clearly happy to see

the farmers of that blighted country blighted further by a

" green light " for GM contamination of the food supply and by

commercial enslavement. This is an edited version of an

article posted by GM Free Cymru, 4 March 2005.

 

========================================================

This article can be found on the I-SIS website at

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMiraq.php

 

If you like this original article from the Institute of

Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving

articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation

or purchase on our website

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/donations.

 

ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation

dedicated to providing critical public information on

cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability

and ecological sustainability in science.

 

 

========================================================

CONTACT DETAILS

 

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London

NW1 OXR

 

telephone: [44 1994 231623] [44 20 8452 2729] [44 20

7272 5636]

 

General Enquiries sam Website/Mailing List

press-release ISIS Director m.w.ho

 

MATERIAL ON THIS SITE MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR ANY PROFIT FREE

PURPOSES WITHOUT PERMISSION, ON CONDITION THAT IT IS

ACCREDITED ACCORDINGLY AND CONTAINS A LINK TO http://www.i-

sis.org.uk/.

ANY COMMERCIAL USE MUST BE AGREED WITH ISIS