The proposed biosafety regulatory regime (hereafter referred to as the “draft biosafety law” or “biosafety law”) of the Republic of Mozambique consists of a draft Decree of Council of Ministers, containing the biosafety regulation and 2 draft technical guidelines for risk evaluation as well as public awareness and participation in biosafety and biotechnology related issues.
The biosafety regulation itself consists of a preamble, 27 articles, organised in 9 chapters and 6 annexes, and a glossary of terms.
The draft biosafety law is typically a permitting system, based on a step-bystep, case-by-case risk assessment, evaluation and decision-making that adopt a risk management approach to genetic engineering in food agriculture and medicine. By this we mean that Mozambique views genetic engineering as having a role to play in agriculture, food security and human health care, but that the risks have to be managed by the creation of an enabling legislative environment, to this end. In other words, Mozambique will follow the route taken by South Africa and permit the entry of GMOs into its agriculture systems, after a desk- top evaluation of the risk assessment data provide by an applicant.
Currently, Mozambique’s seed law prohibits the import and planting of GM
Submission To Chairpersons Of Portfolio Committees Of:
Agriculture And Land Affairs, Environmental Affairs And Tourism, Science And Technology, Health, Trade And Industry, Water Affairs And Forestry, Labour
Mariam Mayet, April 2006
Supported by South African Freeze Alliance on Genetic Engineering, Earthlife Africa, Safe Food Coalition, Ekogaia Foundation, Farmers Legal Action Group-South Africa, Noordhoek Environmental Action Group, Merlin Business Services (Theo Schuurmans), Earth 52 (Harald Witt), Permacore, The Permaculture Foundation of the Western Cape (Noel Marten), Biophile Magazine.
Comments On The Genetically Modified Organsims Amendment Bill (revised Version), 2005
Mariam Mayet, September 2005
A Glimpse Through The Cracks In The Door: South Africa‘s Permitting System For Gmos
Mariam Mayet, January 2005
Submissions On South Africa’s Genetically Modified Organisms Amendment Bill Published 8 October 2004
Mariam Mayet, Nov 2004
Critical Analysis Of Pertinent Legislation Regulating Genetic Modification In Food And Agriculture In South Africa
Mariam Mayet, May 2001
Analysis Of South Africa’s Gmo Act Of 1997
Mariam Mayet, Spring 2000
Regulations No. 1420
Genetically Modified Organisms Act 15 Of 1997
26 November 1999
Genetically modified (GM) pharmaceutical crops are crops which have been genetically engineered / modified to produce pharmaceuticals. These pharmaceuticals can be vaccines, anti-bodies or therapeutic proteins. Pharma-crops (as they are known) are a contested and little-known terrain, with remarkable benefits beingclaimed for them in South Africa. Other voices ask about the contamination of the food supply and the environment, and the social costs of this technology. Following our own research into on the issue the African Centre for Biosafety (ACB) contends that further research is needed into potential risks to human health and the food chain, and that the outcomes of this need to be kept in the public domain.
Regulations Relating To The Labelling Of Foodstuffs Obtained Through Certain Techniques Of Genetic Modification
Now that the dust is settling after industry’s aggressive PR hype about the unsubstantiated increase in South Africa’s GM commercial plantings for 2006, we bring to you, based upon empirical data, a short briefing paper on the field trials of GMOs grown in South Africa during 2006, compiled by ACB researcher, Rose Williams. This briefing paper is a precursor to a biohazard map we have compiled of the field trials for 2006, spread wide across our country, following on from the precedent set by Greenpeace India. This is now available on the ACB website:
The ACB has long held the position that the ISAAA obtains its figures of GM commercial plantings directly from the mouths of the seed companies operating in South Africa, who have an interest in painting a rosy picture of an utterly contested technology.
Industry’s PR has obfuscated important issues such as the impact of the higher price of maize and South Africa’s biofuels policy (conversion of maize to ethanol) on maize production in South Africa and absurdly attributing that to consumer acceptance; the moratorium in South Africa on new GM varieties and concomitant aggressive marketing by industry; and most importantly that South Africa has
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
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
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
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