|
| ||||||||||
New Vision (Kampala)
OPINION
September 17, 2003
Posted to the web September 17, 2003
Opiyo Oloya
Kampala
Letter from Toronto By Opiyo Oloya
Dear Mr President,
As you continue to lead Ugandans in the discussion on whether or not genetically modified organisms (GMO) should be introduced into Uganda, the Government should introduce legislations that will govern new bio-technology including GMOs. The law must specifically spell out how indigenous organic seeds that have been cultivated by generations of Uganda farmers will be protected from contamination by the new technology. The law must also outline measures to safeguard traditional farmers who use organic seeds from undue pressure to switch to GMO seeds. Finally, the law must deal specifically with the problem of farmers who choose to buy GMO seeds one season, but who later save some harvest to plant in the next season.
Mr President, as you know, the big seed corporations spend billions of dollars to research into ways of creating new crops through biotechnology. To recoup their money, these corporations patent the engineered crops, in effect selling licence to farmers who wish to buy the seeds. Though it sounds straight forward, there are currently over 400 major legal cases going through North America courts regarding the use of GMO seeds. For instance, the Supreme Court of Canada will next January hear the issue of what happens when indigenous crops are contaminated by GMO. The case dubbed by the media as David Versus Goliath pits Saskatchewan canola farmer Percy Schmeiser against multinational biotech giant Monsanto. The St. Louis-based company took Mr. Schmeiser to court in August 1998 claiming that the canola farmer had planted the Round-up Ready Canola (which is patented by Monsanto) without paying the licensing fee. Mr Schmeiser countered that the wind blew GMO pollen that contaminated his field of indigenous canola. Monsanto won both the initial court case and subsequent appeal in the Federal Court of Canada, leaving Mr Schmeiser with a legal bill totaling over $200,000 and $175,000 in damages to Monsanto. Mr Schmeiser now completely broke is fundraising money by making speeches all over the world and hopes to win in January.
In another GMO case, Mississippi soybean farmer Homan McFarling was fined $780,000 for growing Roundup Ready soybeans without paying Monsanto's licensing fee. According to court transcripts, Mr McFarling, purchased Monsanto's Roundup Ready(r) soybean seed in 1997 and 1998. Each time, he signed the Technology Agreement and paid the license fee for each purchase. The agreements include the requirement that the seeds are to be used "for planting a commercial crop only in a single season" and direct the licensee not to "save any crop produced from this seed for replanting, or supply saved seeds to anyone for replanting."
Despite the agreement, like any good farmer would want to do, Mr. McFarling saved 1,500 bushels of the patented soybeans from his harvest during one season, and instead of selling these soybeans as crop he planted them as seed in the next season. He repeated this activity in the following growing season, and was adamant that he intended to plant soybeans saved from the 2000 harvest in 2001. Monsanto sued the farmer for infringement and won in subsequent court battles.
In June 2002, the Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee recommended that the Canadian Patent Act be amended to include the right of farmers to collect and reuse seeds harvested from patented plants and to reproduce patented animals for their own use. The committee argued that this would also protect farmers who have accidentally had their crops or animals fertilised or inseminated by a patented plant or animal (for example, if a patented seed blows on to a neighbor's land producing a GMO crop).
Mr President, this is not about one big multinational beating up on small farmers. Rather, the conflict is between traditional farming methods and biotechnology. Like most farmers in Africa, Uganda farmers still respect the idea of keeping part of the harvest as seed. However, the small Uganda farmer in Kasese or Teso who chooses to use GMO seeds must understand that it's a patented product, which means that the company that invented it owns the rights to the seeds.
The farmer, therefore, must abide by licensing agreement or face the full legal weight of the multinational company. It's not far-fetched to imagine a scenario where farmers who violate licensing agreements being ordered by courts to pull out all their corn, or soya-bean crops or whatever.
Mr President, the best approach is for the Government to create clear guidelines in the form of laws that would allow the introduction and use of biotechnology while protecting traditional farming methods and small-scale farmers. For example, there must be a law that will specifically create a buffer zone between a field planted with GMO seeds and one with indigenous crops. Such a law must take into account that pollen may stay in the air for up to six hours and can be carried over hundreds of miles.
Secondly, since farmers who choose to abandon traditional seeds for GMO seeds will now be at the mercy of the multinationals, the law must also protect them from potential price gorging whereby the farmers pay exorbitant prices for seeds at the beginning of each planting season.
The big corporations can take care of themselves. You take care of Uganda farmers.
-----------
FNL
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
