Online Stores

Online-Shopping

Home & Garden

home and garden

Health & Beauty

organic-beauty-products

Mother & Baby

baby-organic-products

Animal & Pet Care

natural-pets-product

Food & Wine

organic-food-and-wine

GMO - Genetically Modified Food

ARIPO PVP law undermines Farmers Rights; Food Security in Africa

This just in from our friends at the African Centre for Biosafety (www.acbio.org.za)

(Dar es Salaam, Harare, Kampala, Johannesburg). The African Regional
Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) has proposed a draft
regional harmonized policy and legal framework on Plant Variety
Protection (PVP), based on the International Union for the Protection
of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) Convention of 1991. The draft legal
framework, if adopted, will have significant adverse consequences for
small-scale farmers that dominate the agricultural landscape of ARIPO
member states,1 as well as for food security, agricultural
biodiversity and national sovereignty in Africa.

African civil society organizations (CSO) have submitted a detailed
critique to ARIPO on the 6 November 2012, expressing their grave
concerns with regard to the fundamentally flawed process involved in
developing the draft PVP policy and legal framework, as well as with
the legal framework itself. According to Mariam Mayet of the African
Centre for Biosafety “The legal framework will not only facilitate
the theft of African germplasm and privatization of seed breeding. It
will ensure the unhindered creation of a commercial seed market, where
the types of seeds on offer are restricted to commercially protected
varieties within a context where farmers’ rights to freely use,
exchange and sell farm-saved seed are seriously eroded.”



The African CSO submission is available at http://tinyurl.com/a4v5gte
.

According to Michael Farrelly from the Tanzania Alliance for
Biodiversity, “the proposed ARIPO law does not take into account the
4.8 million smallholder farmers in Tanzania who depend on agriculture
for their livelihoods, with the vast majority using farm saved seed to
ensure their food security. The proposed legal framework is intent on
handing over Tanzania’s food and seed sovereignty to foreign
corporations, reducing the availability of local plant varieties,
weakening Tanzania’s rich biodiversity, and denying millions of
farmers the right to breed and share crops needed to feed their
families.”

“We are deeply disappointed with ARIPO for adopting the UPOV
1991-style PVP law and completely ignoring the African Model
Legislation for the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities,
Farmers and Breeders. The Model law is much more appropriate in
meeting the needs of ARIPO member states in addressing poverty and the
challenges of climate change” said Moses Mulumba from Center for
Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) in Uganda.

The legal framework has been developed by the ARIPO Secretariat in
consultation with an elite club consisting of the UPOV Secretariat,
multiple actors from the seed industry including CIOPORA, the African
Seed Trade Association (AFSTA), the French National Seed and Seedling
Association (GNIS)) and foreign organizations such as the United
States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the European Community
Plant Variety Office (CPVO).

The participation of farmers, farmer movements and civil society
organizations has been conspicuously absent.

“It is unimaginable that ARIPO could facilitate and encourage
African governments to adopt a comprehensive UPOV 1991 law without
first ensuring that all stakeholders are thoroughly consulted. Before
any further action or decision is taken, it is essential for ARIPO to
undertake comprehensive consultations with all relevant stakeholders
and desist from rushing governments into adopting the draft
legislation.” said Andrew Mushita from the Community Technology
Development Trust, Zimbabwe.

The ARIPO Administrative Council is expected to meet in Zanzibar on
26-30th November 2012 to discuss inter alia the legal framework and
decide whether ARIPO should join UPOV 1991. Decisions will also be
made with regard to ARIPO’s regional office granting and
administering of PVP centrally.

Civil Society groups in Africa, reiterate their calls on ARIPO member
states to:

Reject the development of the ARIPO PVP legal framework on the basis
of UPOV 1991 and for ARIPO states not to join UPOV;
Support the development of a legal framework that acknowledges the
contribution of farmers as breeders and upholds and promotes the
customary practices of small-scale farmers;
Reject the development of a legal framework based on a “one grant
system” (whereby the ARIPO office has the power to grant and
administer breeders’ rights on behalf of all the Contracting
states);
Provide adequate opportunities for consultations with farmers, farmer
movements and civil society organizations before any further work is
undertaken; and
Make available publicly all information with regard to the process
and timelines involved in developing the draft regional policy and
legal framework.

1 ARIPO member states include the following countries: Botswana,
Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia,
Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and
Zimbabwe



For more information:

Mariam Mayet: Tel: +27 83 269 4309 email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Andrew Mushita Tel: + 263 - 4 – 576108 email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Michael Farrelly Tel: +255 (0) 755 503 089 email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Mulumba, Moses Tel:+256 414 – 532283 email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

**This press release is supported by:**

African Biodiversity Network (ABN)

representing 36 organisations in Africa

La Via Campesina Afrique

representing small scale farmers from Zimbabwe, Mozambique,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Angola, Uganda, Tanzania,
Kenya, Zambia, South Africa, Central Africa Republic

Movement for Ecological Learning and Community Action (MELCA)

Ethiopia

Institute for Sustainable Development (ISD)

Ethiopia

Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM)

Kenya

National coordination of peasant organisations of Mali (CNOP)

Mali

Centre for Environmental Policy and Advocacy

Malawi

Never Ending Food

Malawi

Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM)

Rwanda

Abalimi

South Africa

African Centre for Biosafety (ACB)

South Africa

Biowatch

South Africa

DIAKONIA Council of Churches

South Africa

Earthlife Africa eThekwini

South Africa

Farm & Garden Trust

South Africa

Eastern and Southern Africa Small Scale Farmers Forum (ESAFF)

Tanzania

Envirocare

Tanzania

Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM)

Tanzania

Tanzania Alliance for Biodiversity

Tanzania

Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement

Tanzania

Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE)

Uganda

Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD)

Uganda

Eastern and Southern Africa Small Scale Farmers Forum (ESAFF)

Uganda

Food Rights Alliance (FRA)

Uganda

National Organic Agricultural Movement of Uganda (NOGAMU)

Uganda

Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM)

Uganda

Southern and Eastern African Trade Information and Negotiations
Institute (SEATINI)

Uganda

Volunteer Efforts for Development Concerns (VEDCO)

Uganda

Community Technology Development Trust (CTDT)

Zimbabwe

Consumers win GM labelling victory!

This just in from the African Centre for Biosafety:

Consumers in South Africa have won a hard earned victory with regard
to the labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods. Yesterday, the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) published draft amendments to
the regulations governing the labelling of GM food. According to the
draft amendments, all locally produced and imported food containing 5%
or more GM ingredients or components must be labelled as “contains
genetically modified ingredients or components”. The food industry
has to date, taken the view that current GM labelling laws are
ambiguous and do not apply to processed food.

South Africans call for immediate ban on GM maize after shocking cancer study

Explosive results from a new French study conducted on the long-term
health impacts of genetically modified (GM) foods published in the
peer reviewed journal 'Food and Toxicology' last week, suggest that
consumers in South Africa face a very serious threat from one of their
staple foods.

Petition to ban Agent Orange GM Maize in South Africa

I received the following from Liesl at Biodynamic Agricultural Association of Southern Africa recently:

Mother Theresa said that one should be FOR something, not AGAINST. Consider the quality of the energy when you resist, as opposed to supporting the positive alternative. I got the link in the email copied below from about 25 people over the last 2 days. Consumers are becoming aware and taking action. I would like to share my faith in and excitement about solutions manifesting just beyond our reality. I received an enquiry for 34 tons of organic, non-gmo maize on Monday. Let us support the positive alternative. Let's create GMO-free zones. Like an ink blot on wet paper, it spreads. But it starts with you, the grower and you the consumer.

Great attitude! Petition and article follow below.

Petition to ban Agent Orange GM Maize  in South Africa