Your article “Draft policy for GM foods” (October 5) implies that we should feel safe about this highly contentious technology as we have a genetically modified organisms (GMO) Act in place. The GMO Act came into effect on December 1 last year. But before these regulations were even in place, at least 20% of the cotton and 5% of maize grown was already genetically engineered; more than 200 permits for GMOs have been granted without a biosafety regime in place and not a single environmental impact assessment has been carried out to date; or if they have, the government has consistently refused Biowatch SA access to these documents. A group of prominent environmental and development lawyers convened by Biowatch SA to review the Act was unanimous in its criticism of the Act and its newly passed regulations. They commented that the legislation showed “a cynical disregard for contemporary international and national environmental principles, as well as for the development imperatives of South Africa” (a full analysis of the Act is available from Biowatch SA).
The article also mentioned that South Africa was “active in the development of the International Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the Cartegena Protocol”. This is untrue. The CBD was developed at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, at which time South Africa was not even in a position to send a formal delegation.
South Africa is one of the few African countries that have not ratified the Cartegena Protocol, a treaty that calls for much stricter biosafety protocols on GMOs, public participation in decisions around GMOs and stronger protection of indigenous property rights. In fact, South Africa is totally misaligned with the rest of Africa which, under the model national biosafety law proposed by the Organisation for African Unity, intends to apply the “precautionary principle” with this new technology until it is proven safe and beneficial to developing countries.
South Africa, on the other hand, has embraced GMOs, even though many countries around the world, including the European Union, have rejected them because of uncertainties around health and environmental issues, as well as the threat of corporate control over the food chain and indigenous intellectual property. South Africa is known as the “gateway to Africa” by seed multinationals who seek to sell their product in Africa as one of the last markets that might accept it with enough bullying and pressure.
The South African government has allocated R182-million to support a multimillion-dollar private industry in this country, while there is a desperate need for money to research viable alternatives. Haidee Swanby, Biowatch SA