CA: Only Bt eggplant, Golden Rice covered by ruling banning GMOs
The Court of Appeals has narrowed the scope of its earlier decision on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as it clarified that the prohibition on their usage, testing, sale, or importation applied only to Golden Rice and Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) eggplant.
In a 33-page decision dated Aug. 15, the court’s Former Fourth Division removed Item (8) from its April 17 decision, which barred “any application for contained use, field testing, direct use as food or feed, or processing, commercial propagation and importation” of GMOs until government agencies had established ways to monitor and improve risk assessments for these products.
“In this case, only the circumstances, facts and issues covering Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant were considered in rendering the assailed decision,” the appellate court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Jennifer Joy Ong.
It noted that other applicants for the use, testing, sale, or import of GMOs were not included in the case, depriving these of a chance to be heard.
Item 8 only
“Lest we be accused of violating a fundamental right (to due process), the deletion of Item (8) of the dispositive portion of the assailed decision is in order,” the court said.
All other provisions of its April 17 ruling were upheld, including the issuance of a cease and desist order against the commercial propagation of GMO crops Golden Rice and Bt eggplant due to the lack of “full scientific certainty” about their impact.
The appellate court earlier ruled in favor of the petitioners led by Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-Unlad Agrikultura (Masipag) and Greenpeace Southeast Asia, as it revoked the biosafety permits issued by the government to the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) and Philippine Rice Research Institute (PRRI).
Its decision was based on the petition for writs of kalikasan and continuing mandamus with prayer for the issuance of a temporary environmental protection order originally filed by the groups before the Supreme Court on Oct. 17, 2022.
Named respondents in the petition aside from the PRRI and UPLB were the secretaries of the Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources and Department of Health; as well as the director of the DA’s Bureau of Plant Industry.
Partial reconsideration
The appellate court issued its Aug. 15 decision after the petitioners filed a motion for partial reconsideration on May 2 seeking to modify Item 8.
According to them, the Philippines imports GMOs such as yellow corn and soya meal, which are the most important ingredients in animal feeds.
In its comment, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing the respondents from the government, said that it shared the petitioners’ apprehension about the effects of item 8, citing “existing data showing that domestic food and feed industries heavily rely on the importation of GM soybean products.”
The OSG emphasized that the appellate court’s directive under the said provision “hampers the country’s efforts to provide and discover new and valuable information through scientific research and negatively impacts the country’s agricultural industry and biotechnology research.” INQ
