The Environmental Case Against GMOs

Going back to GMO, the case I am talking about is the one mentioned here: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-issues-writ-of-kalikasan-on-genetically-modified-rice-and-eggplant-products/

It’s the case against GMO rice called Golden Rice or Malusog Rice and a GMO eggplant called Bt Eggplant. Golden/Malusog Rice is a rice that “has been modified by inserting a gene from maize and a gene from bacteria found in soil which allows the plant to biosynthesise beta-carotene in the edible parts of rice. Beta-carotene is naturally found in many fruits and vegetables such as squash, papaya and carrots, giving them their yellow colour and it can be synthesised by the human body to make vitamin A".

On the other hand, the Bt Eggplant is “an eggplant (aubergine/brinjal) into which a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis has been inserted.” According to its developer, Bt Eggplant was developed so that the eggplant, like the bacterium Bt, will produce its own toxin, to kill the fruit and shoot borer which is one of several common pests that consume and damage eggplants.

The recent filing of a Petition for Writ of Kalikasan and Continuing Mandamus by MASIPAG, Greenpeace, et al, at the Supreme Court underscores a substantial legal challenge against the commercial propagation of two kinds of GMOs, Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant, in the Philippines. This petition, officially submitted on October 17, 2022, involves several petitioners, namely, Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG), Greenpeace Southeast Asia – Philippines (GREENPEACE), Southeast Asia Regional Initiative for Community Empowerment (SEARICE), Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), Climate Change Network for Community-based Initiatives (CCNCI), Salinlahi Alliance for Children’s Concerns (SALINLAHI), Inc., Orlando Mercado, Teodoro Mendoza, Liza Maza, Reginald Vallejos, Mae Paner, Virginia Nazareno, Jocelyn Jamandron, and Lauro Diego, against GMO regulators and proponents namely, Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Secretary of the Department of Health, Director of the Bureau of Plant Industry of the Department of Agriculture, Philippines Rice Research Institute, and University of the Philippines – Los Banos.

Actually, this case seems to be a sequel of a case filed by mostly the same petitioners more than 10 years ago. These past cases are:

Court of Appeals:

1. Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines), et.a.l versus Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, et.al., CA-G.R. SP No. 00013

Supreme Court:

2. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Inc. v. Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines), G.R. No. 209271, 26 July 2016

3. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Inc. v. Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines), G.R. No. 209271, 08 December 2015

In the present case, the petitioners assert that the commercial propagation of Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant poses substantial risks to the environment, biodiversity, and human health, thereby contravening various legal frameworks such as the 1987 Constitution, the National Biosafety Framework, the Cartagena Protocol of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, the Precautionary Principle of international law, Joint Departmental Circular No. 1-2016, Food Safety Act of 2013, the Organic Agriculture Act, and other pertinent regulations.

 

I gathered some basic Qs and As about this case for our environmental awareness, here they are:

Q: What is the Petition for Writ of Kalikasan and Continuing Mandamus about?

A: The Petition is the legal action of Petitioners MASIPAG, et al to prevent or stop the commercial propagation of Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant.

Q: Why did Petitioners file a Petition for Writ of Kalikasan and Continuing Mandamus?

A: Because the respondents approved Biosafety Permit for commercial propagation of Golden Rice and Biosafety Permit For Direct Use As Food And Feed, Or For Processing of the BT eggplant even though there are dangers of irreversible damage or risks to the environment, biodiversity of rice and eggplant, and human health. The Respondents likewise approved the said biosafety permits despite non-compliance with the rules and regulations governing biosafety licenses and activities, at the time of their issuance and conduct, and other environmental laws. Moreover, respondent UPLB filed an application for commercial propagation of Bt Eggplant without conducting another field trial under the new and stricter standards of JDC No. 1-2016.

Q: Why do Petitioners oppose the commercial propagation of Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant?

A: They oppose the commercial propagation of the said GMOs due to the following reasons:

1. 1. The permits for commercial propagation of golden rice and for direct use as food or feed for Bt eggplant as well as the application for commercial propagation of Bt eggplant have a causal link or reasonable connection to an environmental damage of the nature and magnitude contemplated under the rules on writ of kalikasan.
   2. the Respondent BPI should be mandated to revoke the biosafety permits for commercial propagation of golden rice and for direct use as food and feed of Bt eggplant and deny the application for commercial propagation of Bt eggplant (or revoke it if one has been issued during the pendency of this petition) for failure to comply with, or suspend the effectivity /implementation of these permits until safety and compliance are proven, consistent with, the requirements of JDC No. 1- 2016, the regulation at the time of permits issuance/application, and other environmental laws.
   3. The Petitioners are aggrieved by the act or omission of Respondents DA and BPI. Their health is compromised, and the farmers’ livelihood is at risk given the uncertainties on the safety, environmental impacts and efficacy of these GM crops, and lack of liability safeguards.
   4. Respondents DA and BPI neglected to require the complete submission of all necessary documents for field trial of Golden Rice and proof that Bt eggplant is supposedly safe for consumption.

Q: What do the Petitioners want to happen?

A: The Petitioners would like the Respondents to refrain from commercially propagating Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant until such time that proof of safety and compliance to legal requirements is shown to protect the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology or to the protection, preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of the environment. The Petitioners specifically demanded from the court the following:

1. 1. ISSUE a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) directing Respondents to refrain from commercially propagating Golden Rice and issuing a biosafety permit for commercial propagation of Bt Eggplant;
   2. DIRECT the Respondents to cease and desist from commercially propagating Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant until such time that proof of safety and compliance to legal requirements is shown;
   3. DECLARE all the Biosafety Permits for Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant as null and void; and,
   4. DIRECT the Respondents, as required by the relevant laws and regulation, to perform independent risks and impacts assessments, get the prior and informed consent of farmers and indigenous people, and put in place liability mechanism in case of damages.

For more information about this case, you may contact C-Help. You can also volunteer like me and help protect the environment!