Africa Developing Biosafety Regulations for GMOs

Letter and Five Articles

1. Genetically Engineered Crops In Africa: Biotechnology Investment &
Biosafety Implementation - SADC - Uganda - Kenya - Zambia - South Africa - Zimbabwe - Namibia - Malawi - Nigeria
2. Country Proposes Transformation of GM Cereals
3. Regulation On GM Food Needed
4. Seychelles committed to biosafety
5. Genetically Modified Organism Bill to Be Tabled in House

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

As African countries wake up to the urgent need for biosafety legislation,
development is gathering pace. SADC countries in particular are responding
to the agreement to draw up biosafety strategies with at least the standards
of the Biosafety Protocol.

Angola, finally responding to calls to prevent GM food aid being planted by
farmers, will start to mill the grain into flour.

The Seychelles are drawing up a Biosafety Framework.

Kenya (not part of SADC, and therefore will not necessarily stick to the
Biosafety Protocol) is in the process of drafting a GMO Bill, however USAID
may be heavily influencing this process. If and when the drafting process
opens up to civil society, NGOs and individuals must get involved or risk
that the legislation fails in its responsibility of protecting Kenya and
East Africa from genetically engineered problems.

Below is a brief summary of the status of biotechnology and biosafety in
Africa, although it does not include every country.

Best wishes,

Teresa

1. Genetically Engineered Crops In Africa: Biotechnology Investment &
Biosafety Implementation

Briefing from the Gaia Foundation. Date: 8 October 2003
Teresa Anderson

Overview
GM issues seem to have picked up recently in Africa, no doubt largely due to
the food aid crisis last year. As a result, and because the Cartagena
Protocol on Biosafety came into effect last month, many governments are in
various stages of developing biosafety legislation.

However, there is a real threat to Africa¹s agriculture through this very
same push for biosafety legislation. USAID, who are keen to promote GM
acceptance throughout Africa so as to facilitate the entry of US GM foods,
have won $15 million from the US administration to influence the development
of biosafety legislation in developing countries. They call it ³enhancing
biosafety research, policy and capacity² but we fear that this will mean a
watering down of legislation to the lowest possible biosafety standards. It
is hard to know at this point how involved USAID are in the development of
various countries¹ biosafety strategies. We know that they are working with
various regional organisations.

On the other hand, Germany is providing $2 million to fund the development
of biosafety legislation for Africa. The emphasis and standards will almost
certainly be different because where Germany has signed the Biosafety
Protocol, the US has not, and is opposed to it. The German project,
however, has the endorsement of member states of the African Union. The
two schemes will almost certainly come into conflict with each other.

SADC

· The Southern African Development Community (SADC) have agreed that
the region should develop a common biosafety policy and regulatory system,
based on either the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety or the Africa Model Law
on Biosafety.

· All members of SADC should sign and ratify the Biosafety Protocol if
they have not done so already, and should establish national biosafety
regulatory policies and systems.

· In response to last year¹s food aid crisis, the SADC community
developed measures aimed at protecting countries from GM food aid, through
guidelines on prior informed consent, transport, handling, labelling and
sourcing regionally where possible.

· Recent reports claimed that the committee of SADC scientists had
given the green light to GM, but in fact this was not really true. The SADC
report had echoed the UK Scientific Review, which said that there was no
evidence of human harm from GM, but caution was advised on environmental
grounds.

· The 14 SADC members are: Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of
Congo, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South
Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe

Uganda

· Biotechnology has evidently been pushing hard in Uganda, through a
variety of channels: processed foods, research laboratories, biosafety
policy and food aid.

· In August President Museveni announced that Uganda will accept GM
foods in processed form, implying that this was in response to persuasion
from George W. Bush on his African tour in June.

· A new laboratory, partly funded by USAID and the Rockefeller
Foundation has been set up to research GM bananas.

· USAID is working to ³enhance² biosafety policy with two East African
groups based in Uganda. We presume that they will push for the lowest
possible standards.

· USAID has donated food aid through the WFP to Uganda that comes from
US GM crops.

· Although President Museveni appears to be sympathetic to the US and
GM crops, he has found opposition in many of his MPs. Thus the government is
currently developing biosafety policy and will not accept GM seeds until
that time.

Kenya

· Monsanto is working with the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute
(KARI) to develop virus-resistant sweet potato and insect-resistant cotton
and parasitic weed-resistant maize. (However, low-cost, sustainable
agriculture and breeding programmes have also found solutions to the
problems of sweet-potato virus and parasitic striga.) GM bananas and insect
resistant maize are also being developed through different collaborations.

· Although Kenya seems fairly open to GM technology, they are however
developing National Biosafety Framework. It is not clear how strong this
biosafety policy will be, however, especially since USAID may be influencing
the development of this policy.

· Kenya may also be receiving GM food aid.

Zambia

· During the food aid crisis of 2002, Zambia sent a delegation of
scientists to the US, Europe and South Africa to investigate the
implications of GM food aid acceptance and GM crop commercialisation. The
delegation returned to advise against GM acceptance in any form at present,
since there were concerns about the possible health and environmental
effects on the country.

· Since then the government has re-stated their caution on GM
acceptance.

· Zambia has adopted a National Biotechnology and Biosafety Strategic
Plan, which it is now seeking to implement.

· However, the Biotechnology Outreach Society of Zambia was launched in
September this year, with the intention of aggressively promoting the
benefits of GM.

South Africa

· South Africa is the only African country with commercialised GM
crops. The Bt cotton project in Makhatini has been widely touted as a
success story that demonstrates the greatness of GM. But a recent report by
Aaron DiGrassi of Third World Network showed that the actual results in
terms of yield, profits and farmer income, were nowhere near the successes
claimed. In fact, farmers appeared to be increasingly in debt.

· South Africa is in a unique situation in Africa. As part of SADC, it
has pledged to implement biosafety policies. But these could well conflict
with its current GM commercialisations. It is not certain what the outcome
will be.

Zimbabwe

· Biosafety regulations implemented since 1999.

· Did not accept GM food aid in 2002 unless milled first.

· Is researching various GM crops.

Namibia

· Currently developing a National Biosafety Framework.

· Did not accept GM food aid in 2002 unless milled first.

Malawi

· In 2002, Malawi passed a Biosafety Bill regulating GM, by requiring a
licence to import or use. GM legislation and framework are being
developed.

· Did not accept GM food aid in 2002 unless milled first.

Nigeria

· Developing National Biosafety Framework to control GM in accordance
with the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

· Biotech research on cowpea, yam, cassava and banana

******************************

2. Country Proposes Transformation of GM Cereals

Article from Angola Press Agency. Date: 21 October 2003
http://allafrica.com/stories/200310220018.html

The National Committee for Food Code (Codex-Angola) will forward for
discussion at the Cabinet Council soon a proposal on the transformation into
flour of genetically modified cereals or grains imported by Angola with the
view to avoiding them to be used by the populations as seeds.

The information was released today in Luanda to Angop by Codex-Angola
chairman, Gomes Cardoso, according to whom the genetically modified cereals
or grains like soya, maize and others have effects on human health and
environment still Insufficiently known.

One they are used, they can damage or contaminate the arable lands of the
country.

The GMF are products in which genes of organisms of the same or other animal
or vegetal species are introduced, modifying the characteristics of the
receiving product. Its use is meant to improve the food variety, increasing
the agricultural and animal performance for the elimination of famine and
improve nutrition.

The GMF enter Angola through World Food Programme donations with the view to
assisting the war affected populations. Gomes Cardoso said the preventive
measures are consecrated under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and at
the level of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC).

The Cartagena Protocol includes, because of the concerns raised by the
countries on the potential dangers of the use of GMF, the transfer of GM
cereals to a country should be followed by the principle of precaution, that
is, the exporter should provide all information on the product, with the
consumer deciding whether to use it or not.

Some of the negative effects of the GMF on the human health have already
been identified, as for example, the transfer of an allergic gene of a Brazilian
knot transferred to a variety of soya, causing allergy to the consumers.

Another aspect mentioned of socio-economic character is the loss of access
of the small farmers of the private sector to the main seeds, as well as the
fear of the big companies of the agricultural sector and small farmers in
paying dear the purchase of products that originate from their fields.

The National Committee for Food Code ( CNCA) is a national multisectoral and
multidisciplinary organ and auxiliary to the Codex Food Commission, an
international organisation based in Rome, tasked to supervise the
harmonisation of norms and codes and secure the establishment of equitable
practices in the trade of food products.

***********************************

3. Regulation On GM Food Needed

Article from the Angola Press. Date: 14 October 2003
http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?ID=209601

Luanda, Oct 14 - The country needs to pass a regulation on Genetically
Modified (GM) food so there can be better control on the quality,
quantity and effects of this kind of products when entering Angola,
aiming at providing greater security for consumers.

This position was defended on Tuesday, in Luanda, by the director for the
National Phytogenetic Resources Centre, Elisabeth Matos. Speaking at a lecture on
Genetically Modified Food, she said that, among other measures, the
country should create a national centre on Bio-Technology and Bio-
Security to analyse genetically modified products.

She informed that with the exception of South Africa, the other SADC member
states do not have adequate means of controlling and identifying GM products, adding that the Experts Committee for Bio-Technology and Bio-Security of SADC,
recommends state members to search for food support in the region, in
order to avoid the entrance of contaminated GM products.

During her speech, Elisabeth Matos spoke about the need to pass and approve
a regulation on Genetically Food and the strategies to fight the negative
effects of these products. The lecture was attended by the chairman of
the National Committee for Food Code (Codex Alimentarius), Gomes Cardoso,
the secretary for the Tele-Food Committee, David Tunga, several MPs and
other entities.

**************************

4. Seychelles committed to biosafety

Article from Seychelles Nation. Date: 9 October 2003
http://www.seychelles-online.com.sc/archives/301001003.html

Seychelles is committed to having in place strong safe guards on all aspects
of LMO (Living Modified Organisms) safety before allowing such organisms to
be imported.

As part of such effort, a presentation was held recently with the aim of
educating both Members of the National Assembly and members of the National
Coordinating Committee charged with drawing up a Biosafety Framework to
legislate the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on the aims of
the Cartegena Protocol which address the issues surrounding LMOs.

As the Cartegena Protocol ­ to which Seychelles is a signatory ­ will
attempt to govern the use, handling and movement of LMOs, it was deemed
essential that members of the Committee have a working knowledge of the
Protocol.

Introducing the presentation ­ conducted by local environment consultant
John Nevill ­ the Ministry of Environment's director for Conservation Selby
Remie said that his ministry was pushing for the Cartegena Protocol to be
ratified by the government ahead of the first meeting of signatories, to be
held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in February next year.

Mr Nevill explained that the proposed benefits of LMOs include increased
crop yields, and a reduction in the use of pesticides, herbicides and
fertiliser.

On the negative side, however, there remain concerns over the impact of LMOs
on health, antibiotic resistance, patents, high costs, terminator genes,
contamination of ecosystems, pesticide resistance, ethical and religious
sensibilities and so forth.

Ratifying the Protocol would allow Seychelles to put in place strong safe
guards on all aspects of LMO safety before allowing such organisms to be
imported. However, as there are presently no guidelines on the import of
LMOs it is possible that such organisms are already present in Seychelles,
though Mr Nevill said he believed that this was unlikely.

According to Mr Nevill one avenue which may delay effective legislation
though is the demand for all LMO containing products to be clearly labelled
as such.

Mr Nevill said that the Cartegena Protocol was very heavily based on a
precautionary principle and that it allowed for participating states to
block imports of LMOs on the grounds that allowing them would have unknown
consequences.

Mr Nevill also noted that a significant period of time would be required for
many of these unknown factors to be determined. Taking the example of
current invasive plant species, he said that there was almost no way of
putting a time frame on answering questions on the effects of releasing LMOs
into the environment and that the effects on human health would, as with
other issues related to the long term health effects of other factors, take
a number of generations to accurately determine.

The formation of the National Coordinating Committee and research into the
effects of LMOs and GMOs has been financed by a US$150,000 grant from the
Global Environmental Facility (GEF), via the United Nations Environment
Programme.

The conditions of the GEF grant state that a first draft of the Biosafety
Framework must be completed by November next year.

***********************************

5. Genetically Modified Organism Bill to Be Tabled in House

Article from the East African Standard, Kenya. Date: 8 October 2003
Noel Wandera
http://allafrica.com/stories/200310080424.html

A Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) Bill will soon be tabled in
Parliament. Agriculture Minister Kipruto arap Kirwa said yesterday the
process was being worked on by draftsmen at the Attorney-General's
chambers.

Kirwa said the Bill when enacted into law will prevent the
country from losing the benefits emerging from the technology, especially
in the area of preserving Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). Giving a
sneak preview of what the law involves, Kirwa said it will provide
researchers with guidelines and emphasize on capacity building.

Speaking in his boardroom, he also announced that Kenya will host the Annual
General Meeting of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research. The meeting to be attended by 1,000 delegates will fetch the
country over Sh700 million. It will be held in Gigiri between October 27
and October 31.

During the conference, Kirwa will chair a round table
meeting and lay out Kenya's agricultural agenda in respect to addressing
national and regional programmes.

The Narc Government has placed agriculture top on its priority to help
jump-start the economy.

Kirwa said though Kenya was home to leading international research bodies,
farmers had not fully benefited from the institution's cutting-edge
research findings. Kenya, which became a full member of CGIAR in 1995, is
the only country in the world to host two of CGIAR centres, namely the
International Centre For Research in Agroforestry and International
Livestock Research Institute. However, Kirwa said the Government was in
the process of linking the farmers up with the institutions.

The minister was flanked by Agriculture Permanent Secretary Joseph Kinyua,
his Education counterpart Prof Karega Mutahi and Agriculture Director Dr
Joseph Wanjama. Also present were ILRI Director, Mr Bruce Scott, his
Icraf and Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (Kari) counterparts
Dennis P Garrity and Romano Koome respectively.