INTERNATIONAL LAW AND GMOS: AN APPLICATION OF PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Abstract

The commercial utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in daily life has dramatically increased and revealed a broad range of interests among scientists and other stakeholders like farmers, consumers, governments etc. on the possibility of regulation of GMOs. This selective modification and the resulting organisms thereof have become the controversy all over the world. There are so many benefits of GMOs for example in agriculture: increased crop production, reduced need for pesticide and herbicide, enrich nutrient composition etc. but genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have always been considered a threat to environment and human health. Within this controversy, the precautionary principle has become a contentious issue to handle lack of scientific understanding and scientific disagreement with high support from skeptical groups but resisted by GMO advocates. The growth in the production and consumption of GMOs, has produced discussions about pros and cons concerning their legal regulation. Since precautionary principle is an important issue within the frame work of sustainable development. Through this principle, sustainability can provide a normative standard, help to disclose the impact and negotiate the uncertainty of GMOs. This article describes various controversial scenarios related to issues such as World Trade Organization restrictions that have prevented major GMOs producers such as the United States, Canada, and Argentina from commercializing their products. In particular, the author makes a global analysis with reference to the precautionary principle. The Precautionary Principle is considered a central element of a fundamental right to a healthy environment and therefore affects multiple legal and economic interests in which its existence is required.

References

1. Katz, Deborah, “The Mismatch between the Biosafety protocol and the Precautionary Principle” (2001) Geo. Int’l En
2. Ewen, Stanley W.B. y Pusztai, Arpad, “Effects of Diets Containing Genetically Modified Potatoes Expressing Gaianthus nivalis Lectin on Rat Small Intestine” (1999) 354 Lancet at 1353
3. Nordlee, J. A., S. L. Taylor, J. A. Townsend, L. A. Thomas, and R. K. Bush. 1996. ‘‘Identification of a Brazil-nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeans.’’ The New England Journal of Medicine 334
4. V.E Prescott., Campbell P.M., Moore A., Mattes J., Rothenberg M.E., Foster P.S., Higgins T.J.V. & Hogan S.P. 2005. Transgenic expression of bean alphaamylase inhibitor in peas results in altered structure and immunogenicity. Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry
5. Neugebauer, Regine, “Fine-tuning WTO jurisprudence and the SPS Agreement: Lessons from the beef hormones case” (2003) 31 Law & Pol’y Int’l Business 4 at 1256-2257
6. EC Measures Concerning Meat & Meat Products, Panel Reports: Case WI/DS26/R/USA, August 18, 1997 & WT/DS48/R/CAN, August 18, 1997; Appellate Body Report: WT/DS26/AB/R&WT/DS48/AB/R, January 16