Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T09:34:17.914Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Commission's New Approach to the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sara Poli
Sara Poli*
Affiliation:
University of Rome ‘Tor Vergata’, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Commission has proposed to legitimise the renationalization of the cultivation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) accepting the request of a group of Member States who raised concerns at the Environment Council of June 2009 regarding the EU-wide decisions on GMO2 cultivation.

Type
Symposium on the EU’s GMO Reform
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 339 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Austria, Bulgaria, Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland and Slovenia. See document 11226/2/09 REV 2 presented at the Environment Council on the 25th of June 2009.

2 See also the Conclusions of the Environment Council of the 4th of December 2008.

3 COM (2010) 380 of 13th July 2010.

4 Commission Recommendation on guidelines for the development of national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops, COM (2010), 4822 final of the 13th of July 2010. It should be noted that the new Recommendation on coexistence is based upon Art. 292 of the TFEU, which is a new provision of the Lisbon Treaty enabling the Council to adopt recommendations on a proposal from the Commission. For more detailed comments, see the contribution written by Justo Corti Varela in this issue.

5 Commission Recommendation 2003/556 of the 23rd of July 2003 on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming, OJ [2003] L 189, p. 36.

6 COM (2010) 375 of 13th July 2010.

7 These interests are taken into consideration only if the authorization is requested under Regulation 1829/2003.

8 Directive on the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, OJ L 204 [1998], p. 37.

9 Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming. Second report on coexistence, COM (2009), 153, p. 6.

10 COM (2010) 380, p. 6.

11 COM (2010) 380, pp. 4–5.

12 The results of the evaluation will be collected in a final report which is drawn up by a group of consultants (EPEC).

13 For a view that Art. 114 TFEU is the appropriate legal basis, see Maria Weimar's contribution in this issue.

14 COM (2010) 375, p. 8.

15 See Poli, S., “Continuity and Change in the EU regulatory Framework on GMOs after the WTO Dispute on «Biotech Products»,” 37(2) Legal Issues of Economic Integration (2010), p. 139.Google Scholar

16 COM (2010) 375, p. 2.

17 COM (2010) 375, p. 7.

18 COM (2010) 375, p. 12.

19 For a contrary view see Justo Corti Varela's contribution in this issue.

20 COM (2010) 375, p. 4.

21 See the contrary views of other contributors to this symposium.

22 In 2009, MON810 was cultivated in 5 Member States: Spain, the Czech Republic, Romania, Portugal, and Slovakia. Spain cultivates around 80 % of the total EU area used for the cultivation of MON810 (circa 100 000 ha). See Memo-10-58, 2 March 2010.

23 It should be noted that Hungary has recently challenged the two Commission Decisions authorising the cultivation of the concerned GMO and its use in food or feed. See Case T-240/17 of 27 May 2010, Republic of Hungary v. Commission, pending.