07 Jun 2005

The Cartegena Protocol, which entered into force on the 11th September 2003, seeks to clarify international rules for genetically modified commodities. In short it is an attempt to increase bio-safety in the transfer of living genetically modified organisms (“LMO”) between countries. For more information view FAQ

The Second Meeting

There are 118 Countries who have ratified the protocol and they have recently met Montreal to clarify the rules that will need to be implemented under the Protocol.

In Particular Article 18.2 provides that parties to the Protocol shall take a decision on the detailed documentation requirements for shipments of GMOs that are intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing no later than two years after it came in force. Such things include corn, soybean and other agriculture commodities intended for food, feed or processing. The meeting did not succeed in achieving this task.

Despite lengthy negotiations and several attempts at compromise, Brazil and New Zealand recorded their formal reservations during the closing plenary session, and adoption of the decision was deferred to third meeting. The main disagreements were around:

• The requirement to specify which LMOs a shipment may contain; and
• Thresholds for adventitious or technically unavoidable presence of LMOs and whether or not they trigger the documentation requirement.

The Liability Question

One of issues discussed was liability and redress in the context of the Protocol, which concerns the question of what would happen if the trans-boundary movement of living modified organisms has caused damage. New Zealand’s stance is a far cry from the reality of its current situation. In these negotiations we would have expected negotiators to promote rules protecting its food producers and environment from contamination but this is far from the case, in fact it has caused a stir amongst other representatives.

Five options on liability were already on the table for the form of agreement that would ultimately specify liability provisions under Cartagena. They are:

1. Legally binding agreement
2. Legally binding agreement plus interim measures
3. Non-binding agreement
4. Two stage - non-binding, then binding agreement
5. Combination of non-binding and binding agreement

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade had a sixth one added to the list, that there be no liability instrument at all. It is important to look at this in the context of the fact that currently New Zealand does not grow any genetically modified organisms.

An Ad Hoc Group on liability and redress was established, with a view to completing its work in 2007 to:

• Review information relating to liability and redress for damage resulting from transboundary movements of LMOs;
• Analyse general issues relating to the potential and/or actual damage scenarios of concern and application of international rules and procedures on liability and redress to the damage scenarios; and
• Elaborate options for elements of rules and procedures on liability and redress.

Further information on the meeting is available on the Website

To view a summary of the entire meeting from 25 May – 3 June click here

Response to New Zealand