Publications SA

Publications SA

SA biosafety regulators in bed with industry on GM potatoes?

The South African government has approved a United States funded project that will soon see genetically engineered potatoes sprouting in six secret locations in African soil. Similar potatoes were first grown in the United States but were withdrawn from the market due to consumer resistance.

read more

BT-Cotton COT200-Cry1Ab, RRCotton, (Syngenta)

  • Bt-Cotton COT200-Cry1Ab / Syngenta
  • Bt-Cotton COT102-Cry1Ab / Syngenta
  • RoundupReady-Cotton / Syngenta
SUBMISSION OF OBJECTIONS BY THE AFRICAN CENTRE FOR BIOSAFETY (ACB)
Objections to the Application made by Syngenta South Africa in Respect of the Following Events to the National Department of Agriculture, South Africa.

Mariam Mayet and Shenaz Moola, July 2004

read more
SYNOPSIS – AFRICAN CENTRE FOR BIOSAFETY
1. Provision of false and misleading information material to the approvals sought

The notifier claims that there are no wild relatives of cotton in South Africa (5.5 of the application). It has come to our attention that this is not the case and we have a concern that we have been misled by the notifier’s claims in this regard. There are about 39 species of Gossypium. They are found worldwide in the tropics and warm temperate regions with several species cultivated. There are three species in southern Africa, occurring in northern Namibia, Northern Botswana, Northern Province, Mpumulanga, Swaziland and KwaZulu-Natal. These three species of Gossypium are Gossypium anomalum subsp. anomalum which occurs in Namibia, Gossypium herbaceum subsp africanum which occurs in Namibia, Botswana, Limpopo, Mocambique, Swaziland and KwaZulu-Natal and Gossypium triphyllum which occurs in Namibia and Botswana. According to Cotton

BT-Maize 176 / Syngenta

Protest letter by the African Centre for Biosafety, the South African Freeze Alliance on Genetic Engineering, Biowatch, and the Safe Food Coalition
  • Demand for a Ban on Imports of Bt176 and for a Public Enquiry into Safety of Food Derived from Genetically Modified Crops
    African Centre for Biosafety, the South African Freeze Alliance on Genetic Engineering, Biowatch, and the Safe Food Coalition, May 2004
read more
  • European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Report
OVERVIEW

Dear Honourable Madam Ministers

We wish to bring your attention to the decision taken by the Spanish government on the 29th April 2004, to ban Syngenta’s genetically modified (GM) Bt176 maize for commercial cultivation on the grounds that it may confer resistance to ampicillin. (EIEstado espanol retirara un OGM a instancias de la UE. El maize Bt 176 Podrian provoca resistencisas a los antibioticals, GARA). According to Richard Lopez de Haro, Spain’s Office of Crop Varieties, Spain’s food safety authority banned Bt 176 after the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published its report on the utilisation of antibiotic resistance market genes in GM plants.

We also point out that even the United States, the world’s largest grower and exporter of genetically modified

Roundup Ready Wheat / Monsanto

SUBMISSION OF OBJECTIONS BY THE AFRICAN CENTRE FOR BIOSAFETY (ACB)

Objection to Public Notice by Monsanto SA (Pty) Ltd, Published in BUSINESS DAY, Monday, 19th January 2004: Application for commodity clearance permit for genetically modified wheat
African Centre for Biosafety, February 2004
Endorsed by Safe Food Coalition; Ekogia Foundation; Steering Committee, South African Freeze Alliance On Genetic Engineering (Safeage); Earthlife Africa Ethekwini; Earth Women; African Rainbow Circle; Ukudla Kwethu; Mdumiseni Ndlela; Freedom Extravaganza Group; Khuzwayo; Wray White & Riaz Tayob

read more
OVERVIEW

We, the undersigned organisations, groups and individuals, hereby lodge our objections to the above application. We ask that the decision-making authority, the Executive Council established in terms of the Genetically Modified Organisms Act (No. 15 of 1997) (“GMO Act”) either on its own, or in consultation with the Advisory Committee reject Monsanto‘s application. We are of the firm belief that ample grounds exist for Monsanto’s application to be rejected out of hand, alternatively, that Monsanto’s application is rejected on the basis of the precautionary principle, which is well established in the body of environmental law and policy in South Africa.

Our objections are principally based on the following, which is fully canvassed

BT-Maize 176 / SyngentaBt-Potato G2 & G3 / South African Agricultural Research Council

SUBMISSION OF OBJECTIONS BY THE AFRICAN CENTRE FOR BIOSAFETY (ACB), BIOWATCH, AND EKOGAIA
  • GMPotatoesObjection.pdf Additional Comments and Objections to Continued Trials of GM Potatoes

    African Centre for Biosafety, supported by various organisations, groups, companies, and individuals, Mar 2006

  • objection_bt_potato_g2_g3.pdf Objections to application for a permit for additional trials with insect resistant Bt Cry V Genetically Modified Potatoes (Solanum Tuberosum L. Variety ‘Spunta’ G2 and G3), as applied for by Dr G. Thompson, Director Plant Protection and Biotechnology , South African Agricultural Research Council, dated 24 May 2004 Download 157Kb

    G. Ashton, G. Baker, M. Mayet, E. Pschorn-Strauss, W. Stafford, June 2004

  • Report2_Bt_Potato_G2G3.pdf Report 2003/2004 GMO Potato Project.

    ARC-Roodeplaat, Vegetable and Ornamental Plant Institute and the Michigan State University (USA), made public in June 2004
    Download 156Kb

OVERVIEW

1 Rights of Access to information severely prejudiced

The extensive deficiencies in the information supplied by the Applicant in response to our request for access to information in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (“PAIA”) coupled with the conflicting time frames provided by the Regulations under the Genetically Modified Organisms Act 15 of 1997 (“GMO Act” and those provided by PAIA, have severely restricted our rights to access

BT-Maize 11 / Syngenta

SUBMISSION OF OBJECTIONS BY BIOWATCH and THE SOUTH AFRICAN FREEZE ALLIANCE ON GENETIC ENGINEERING
  • Appeal against the decision of the Executive Council for Genetically Modified Organisms, to authorise various activities of Syngenta Seed Co. (Pty) Ltd regarding maize event Bt11, under the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, 15 of 1997.
    Winstanley Smith & Cullinan Inc. on behalf of Biowatch, October 2003
read more
OVERVIEW
Appeal against the Bt11 decision of the Executive Council

The Biowatch Trust (“Biowatch”) is a national non-governmental organisation that acts in the public interest. It was established in response to, among other things, concerns arising from the widespread commercialisation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in South Africa, and the absence of civil society involvement in the determination of policy and law, and in decision-making, regulating their use, control and release. Biowatch is aggrieved by the actions and decisions of the Executive Council for Genetically Modified Organisms (“the Council”) and/or the Registrar: Genetically Modified Organisms (“the Registrar”), relating to an application made to the Directorate: Genetic Resources, Department of Agriculture, by Syngenta Seed Co. (Pty) Ltd (“Syngenta”), for the import of maize event Bt11 (“Bt11 maize“) seed and the commercial planting and general release of

Monsanto

Monsanto and Genetic Modification in South Africa Facts For South African Consumers – Feb 2006
African Centre for Biosafety.

read more

Factsheet: Who Benefits From Gm Crops? Monsanto and the Corporatedriven Genetically Modified Crop Revolution- Jan 2006
Friends of the Earth International.

read more

A Profile Of Monsanto In South Africa – Apr 2005
Mariam Mayet.

read more