Address regarding the Bill for the Amendment of the Genetically Modified Organisms Act

We think, however, that the moratorium is a measure which is not in conflict with our demand that the act be as restrictive as possible against the deliberate release of GMO into the environment, compliant with the European Directives, and in conformity with the publicly announced position of the Prime Minister and the Government.

Upon the receipt of the EC response to the enquiry made by Environmental Association Za Zemiata, it became clear that the official notification letter to Bulgaria of infringement procedure № 2009/2032 concerns only and exclusively “the contained use of genetically modified microorganisms (GMMs)”. This was borne out by the notification letter itself published later by the media, wherefrom it became clear that there are no texts whatsoever referring to the GMO Act in the part thereof concerning the deliberate release into the environment.

The European Commission made a request to precise only some incorrectly transposed texts in the existing 2005 GMO Act relating to the contained use of GMMs pursuant to Directive 98/81/EC.

The specific requirements of the EC are only to correct the technical errors and incorrect phrasings in the transposing of the Directive into the 2005 GMO Act resulting from bad translation, as well as to ensure an obligatory consultation with the European Parliament regarding the decisions and the possibility of the Council of Ministers to approve or reject approval proposals with a qualified majority.

The motives of the depositors of the bill, also evident from the shorthand record of the 57th sitting of the National Assembly from 13th January 2010, violate the Law on Regulatory Acts (LRA), which stipulates that the drawing up of a draft of a regulatory act shall be carried out in compliance with the principles of substantiation, stability, openness and coordination (art. 26, par. 1).

Furthermore, the requirements under art. 28, par. 2, items 3, 4 and 5 of LRA about the changes concerning the deliberate release of GMO into the environment are not fulfilled and bringing this variant of the bill forward is a violation of the law. According to art. 28, par. 3 of LRA a draft of a regulatory act, which is not accompanied by motives, respectively a report, pursuant to the requirements of par. 2, shall not be discussed by the competent authority. Directive 2001/18/EC, concerning the deliberate release of GMO into the environment, which the depositors use to motivate their amendment proposals , has already been transposed into the law and there are no recommendations as to its transposition in the letter of EC from April 2009.

Further to the above arguments, we consider that the depositors of the bill should take into account the public interest and the demands made for “Bulgaria – Free of GMO” and to exert the rights of our country as a EU member state under art. 95 (former art. 100а) of the Treaty establishing the European Community. Only after undertaking the respective actions, should we resort to the other regulated mechanisms.

We do hereby explicitly state that our protests and the present declaration have no political pretext whatsoever and only express our concern and position of Bulgarian citizens and Europeans. We will not allow them to be politicized and made use of by any political party.

As citizens, actively following the governing processes in the country, we insist on the stability of the state and the effective work of the government. We insist on Bulgaria being governed by a nationally responsible government, which is obligatory if the position of Bulgaria in terms of GMO is really the publicly announced one, namely, for “Bulgaria – Free of GMO”.

Our main position, demands and arguments are:

* We take into account the necessity of additional mechanisms to guarantee the public and national interest, which at present is apparently protected most objectively by civil groups and non-governmental organizations. Thus we demand regulatory guarantees of strong representation with a right to vote for the non-governmental professional, environmental and consumer organizations in the Advisory Committee on Genetically Modified Organisms.

Arguments:

The present GMO Act provides for an Advisory Committee consisting of persons having academic ranks only. This reduces the possibility of transparent and equal participation of the other interested parties, namely – citizens’ organizations, including professional, environmental and consumer ones. The lack of a wider circle of experts with a right to vote (incl. practitioners) results in the lack of effective civil participation and a corrective and allows for a conflict of interests, which in its turn will lead to a substitution of the national interest.

* We insist on putting an end to the speculations about the necessity to transpose Directive 2001/18/ЕC, since there are no objective grounds for that.

Arguments:

The existing GMO Act was passed in 2005 and it is part of the pre-accession programme of R. Bulgaria. Directive 2001/18/ЕC is on the protection of the environment and human health and the application of the Precautionary Principle and it provides a wide framework for the member states, depending on their national policy in terms of GMO.

* We insist that all bans on the deliberate release of GMO in the environment existing presently in the GMO Act be kept.
* We insist on preserving the buffer zone of 30 kilometers around Natura 2000, which is not a “general ban” and only aims at protecting Bulgaria from subsequent infringement procedures for damages to its biodiversity (Directive 92/43/ЕЕС on the conservation of natural habitats and Directive 79/409/ЕЕС on bird protection). We also insist on the introduction of buffer zones of 5 km around each apiary, due to the confirmed danger from the effects of GMO on bees, and as well as a buffer of 15 km around each seed production farm with a view to guaranteeing and preserving the pureness of the traditional Bulgarian varieties and crops.

Arguments:

Our proposals for amendment of the articles, concerning the protection of the Natura 2000 zones and the 30-kilometer belt around them, as well as the protection of the traditional varieties and crops, regulated by of the existing GMO Act, do not contradict the European directives, on the contrary - they are in the spirit of Directive 2001/18/ЕC and guarantee the biodiversity and environment protection.

* We think that since EU has regulated the field trials in Directive 2001/18/ЕС and has not given Bulgaria any explicit recommendation in this respect, we are not entitled to classify field trials in our country in any other way and consider them separately, so the texts related to such amendments should be rejected.

Arguments:

Except for the cases when a GM product is allowed to be grown in EU, the question about its deliberate release into the environment is left to the member states which may pursue an independent policy. The situation of taking decisions on allowing the trials in the national territory with hybrids banned from the European market is analogous.

The motive that field trials are necessary in order to prove the harm from GMO, is neither truthful nor serious, because the member states may use the grounds of another country, which has already introduced a safeguard clause for the hybrid in question.

Up to the present moment in the member states with harmonized legislation there is a practice of non-admission of the deliberate release of GMO into the environment, which proves this practical possibility and the lack of contradiction with the EU legislation. In confirmation, these countries have imposed the so-called de facto moratorium and in the European Community no infringement procedure has been opened against them.

Having in mind the publicly announced firm position of the Prime Minister and the Government against the deliberate release of GMO into the environment of Bulgaria, we insist and expect that the National Assembly will approve only the amendments concerning Directive 98/81/EC, and reinstate the restrictive regime concerning the deliberate release of GMO into the environment.

We insist that:

1. In the Genetically Modified Organisms Act Amendment Act only the amendments regarding the contained use of GMO remain, as per the motives provided with the bill – item by item of letter with outgoing No. N:2009/2032 C(2009)2413 from 14th April 2009 of EC on the rectification of the technical errors and incorrect phrasings made at the transposition of Directive 98/81/EC, which is an amendment of Directive 90/219/EEC. All other amendments of the now existing GMO Act should be rejected and brought up for a wide-ranging public discussion with the guaranteed participation and right to vote of the representatives of professional, consumer, civil and environmental non-governmental organizations.
2. The safeguard clause under art. 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC for the maize hybrid МОН810 be imposed, which should be reflected in the law, as well as that a safeguard clause for each GMO hybrid which may be allowed from now on in the EU territory be imposed.
3. When voting in the EU, the Bulgarian representatives and ministers strictly adhere to the presumption of restrictive policy in terms of GMO expressed by the Bulgarian society.
4. Together with the forthcoming adoption of the moratorium on the deliberate release of GMO into the environment, we insist that the National Assembly approve a resolution on a national strategy, by which Bulgaria is to be proclaimed a zone free of GMO. The resolution should indicate clearly the economic interests of Bulgaria in protecting and developing ecologically clean, organic and traditional agriculture and produce labeled “GMO Free”, preserving and protecting of the protected territories and eco-tourism.

Otherwise, we will refer the violation of the Law on Regulatory Acts to all Bulgarian and international competent authorities, as well as the lack of consideration for the public opinion and the lack of public debate to the European Commission.

Only if the above demands are satisfied, we shall be sure that the announced of “Bulgaria free and clean of GMO” position will become a reality!

At the same time this will be the best advertisement of our country, which will secure guaranteed markets for each Bulgarian product labeled “GMO Free”.

Approving the GMO Act Amendment Act in its present form, passed at first reading, is in sharp contradiction with the publicly announced position of the Prime Minister and the Government, and a moratorium on an act, which is unacceptable and dangerous for our biodiversity and health, will not secure a guaranteed protection for Bulgaria.

Date: 09.02.2010

Sofia

On behalf of:

1. Initiative Committee of Parents and Citizens
2. National Association of Grain Producers
3. Bulgarian Association Bioproducts
4. Farmer BG
5. National Scientific Association for Apiculture
6. “For the Nature” Coalition:

Association of Parks in Bulgaria, Bulgarian Association for Alternative Tourism, Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds, Bulgarian Association of Phytocenology – 2001, Bulgarian Biodiversity Foundation, Centre for Environmental Information and Education, Culture Club “Future now”, Association “Agrolink”, BALKANI Wildlife Society, Za Zemiata (For the Earth) Association, Borrowed Nature Association, “Eco Mramor” Association, “Green Balkans” Federation, “Nature Fund” Association, Club UNECO of the Student Council at Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, “Shtastlivetza” Sofia Civil Association, “Let’s Save Irakli” Civil Group, “Citizens for Rila”, “Eco Rila” – Samokov Association, Bulgarian Climbing and Mountaineering Federation and WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme in Bulgaria.

7. “Active Consumers" Association
8. Public Environmental Centre for Sustainable Development – Varna
9. Foundation for Environment and Organic Agriculture
10. Bioselena Foundation
11. Regional Cooperative Council - V. Tarnovo
12. Bulgarian National Association Essential Oils, Perfumery and Cosmetics
13. National Chefs Guild
14. Information portal Farmer.bg

Translation: Hristina Zhivkova