|
|
|
|
|
|
The legal risks of GMO food and farming
What will happen if Irish farmers who are contaminated by patented GM seeds and crops get sued for patent infringement by giant transnational corporations like Monsanto?
What will happen to contaminated organic farmers who lose their certification? What will happen to conventional farmers whose produce is refused by Europe's 60 leading food brands and retailers?
What will happen if consumers of contaminated Irish food at home or abroad get sick as a result of eating GM food approved by the Government, including meat and dairy products from aimals fed on a GM diet? Remember the false safety claims made by the tobacco industry. Millions are dying from tobacco-related cardiovasuclar disease and cancer, costing taxpayers a fortune in healthcare costs and increased insurance premia, and resulting in multi billion dollar class action lawsuits in the USA.
|
|
The European Commission and the Irish Government (including the Department of Health and Children, the Department of Agriculture and Food, the Department of the Environment and Local Government, and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland) routinely make spurious and/or fraudulent claims about the safety of GM seeds, crops and food. Future generations will hold all of these bodies fully accountable if they continue to collude with the biotech industry's strategy to force GMO seeds and crops into Europe.
Contamination of the food chain by GM ingredients and GMOs is likely to open a veritable Pandora'
s box of legal actions against the Irish Government, seed distributors, farmers, food producers, food distributors and food retailers.
Anticipated lawsuits include:
|
1. |
Biotechnology companies versus contaminated farmers. For example, Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser got sued by Monsanto after his fields became contaminated by their patented GMOs in 1996. Monsanto wanted the profits from his entire crop, a technology charge, plus a million dollars in court costs. After years of court battles, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Monsanto's financial claims in 2004, but ruled the patented GM crops are the company's property. This ruling opened the door for massive class action lawsuits currently underway against Monsanto for losing control of its patented crops. See our interview with Percy Schmeiser.
For more information, download the Monsanto vs. US Farmers report published by the US Center for Food Safety in 2005. This details Monsanto's attempt to seize control of staple agricultural crops, its onerous contracts, and its persecution of contaminated farmers. (Note: this 84-page 3.4 MB PDF file will take a while to download without a high speed connection).
|
2. |
Conventional farmers versus GM farmers, due to risk of contamination, contamination GM labeling requirements, and loss of market share;
|
3. |
Organic farmers versus GM farmers due to risk of contamination, contamination, GM labeling requirements, loss of organic certification, and violation of constiutional right to earn a livelihood;
|
4. |
Conventional farmers versus biotechnology companies due to contamination, GM labeling requirements, and loss of market share;
|
5. |
Organic farmers versus biotechnology companies due to risk of contamination, contamination, GM labeling requirements, loss of organic certification, and violation of constiutional right to earn a livelihood;
|
6. |
Farmers versus GM animal feed suppliers due to contamination, GM labeling requirements, and loss of market share;
|
7. |
Farmers versus GM animal feed distributors due to contamination, GM labeling requirements, and loss of market share;
|
8. |
Farmers versus the Government;
|
9. |
Seed supppliers versus biotechnology companies for contaminating their seeds;
|
10. |
Consumers who have lost the right to chose GM free food;
|
11. |
Consumers who have fallen ill from GM foods versus food suppliers, retailers, farmers, and the Government.
|
|
Legal protection
Strict liability for GMOs is needed to protect farmers, consumers and the environment. Consumer choice, environmental safety and the protection of conventional and organic farming must override the commercial pressures from the biotech industry.
The time has come for the Irish Government to take urgent legal steps to:
|
a. |
follow the lead of other EU governments by declaring Ireland a GMO-free zone, and work with the UK government and the Northern Irish Assembly to extend this status to the whole island of Ireland;
|
b. |
prevent contamination of food and feed supplies at the minimum detection threshold of 0.1% instead of the current GM food labeling threshold of 0.9%;
|
c. |
protect the rights of conventional and organic farmers to grow GM-free produce;
|
|
If the Government fails to implement the above and instead follows its current misguided policy "to ensure the co-existence" of GM crops with conventional and organic farming, then it should:
|
i. |
require prior mandatory insurance (not funded by the State) for any company or farmer who wishes to release GMO seeds or crops into the environment;
|
ii. |
make GMO producers and operators financially liable for contamination;
|
iii. |
place all the costs associated with the so-called "co-existence" of GMO crops on GMO producers and operators.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
