Home page > Food and Agriculture > Food and Nutrition > GMOs and Biotech Food > EU regulations exclude GMO-free (...)

EU regulations exclude GMO-free zones in Europe


The European Commission decided on 2nd September to turn down GMO-free zones as it rejected a request from the Upper Austrian regional Government to ban the use of genetically engineered seeds.

The Austrians (supported by Wales and a few local authorities in the west of England) had asked permission from Brussels to introduce a three-year long ban on GMO-seeds as the coexistence between GM and non-GM methods of agricultural production are not fully resolved.

The Commission then consulted the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) which issued an opinion that ruled out the GMO-free zones plans.

The Commission finally concluded that such a ban would be in breach of the EU Treaty and could not even be allowed under the special environment protection clause, under Article 95(5).

Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström said that "it is possible to find a viable response within the existing legal framework".

Greenpeace thinks that Austria should not fear bringing the case to the European Court of Justice.

Last modified on September 10 2004.

Your feedback is valuable to us!

Was this article interesting and relevant for you? Do you have any comments?

 You can post a reply to this article here.

1 Message

Our readers have published these comments:

17 May 2007 15:24, by Johan

EU regulations exclude GMO-free zones in Europe

Did the Commission say why GMO free zones could not be allowed under 95(5)?

Treaty of Rome 95(4-6) says:

"4. If, after the adoption by the Council or by the Commission of a harmonisation measure, a Member State deems it necessary to maintain national provisions on grounds of major needs referred to in Article 30, or relating to the protection of the environment or the working environment, it shall notify the Commission of these provisions as well as the grounds for maintaining them.

5. Moreover, without prejudice to paragraph 4, if, after the adoption by the Council or by the Commission of a harmonisation measure, a Member State deems it necessary to introduce national provisions based on new scientific evidence relating to the protection of the environment or the working environment on grounds of a problem specific to that Member State arising after the adoption of the harmonisation measure, it shall notify the Commission of the envisaged provisions as well as the grounds for introducing them.

6. The Commission shall, within six months of the notifications as referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, approve or reject the national provisions involved after having verified whether or not they are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States and whether or not they shall constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market.

In the absence of a decision by the Commission within this period the national provisions referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 shall be deemed to have been approved.

When justified by the complexity of the matter and in the absence of danger for human health, the Commission may notify the Member State concerned that the period referred to in this paragraph may be extended for a further period of up to six months."

Is it the word "specific in par 5 that creates a problem? Otherwise, no legal problem, or?

See online : http://johansegen.blogspot.com

Reply to this message