corn fax - Printer Friendly

Demand the CEC remove biotechs from Advisory Group investigating GE corn

December 5, 2002

On October 7 the Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) named members to a 16 person Advisory Group to investigate the GE corn contamination in Mexico. The formal request to investigate the contamination was presented to the CEC by indigenous, campesinos, and other civil society organizations on April 24. The Secretariat of the CEC, established under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), to promote environmental cooperation between NAFTA countries, and implement the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), notified NAFTA member countries on June 20th that the Commission would study the impacts of Genetically Engineered corn on native species, as well as carry out a nationwide genetic testing project of native corn samples for contamination. The Advisory Group will guide the CEC Secretariat's corn investigation and will participate in the development of the special report to the CEC's Council.

While the CEC's acceptance to review the case represents an important institutional step forward to investigate the contamination of native Mexican corn, the Commission's recent naming of the Advisory Group for the corn case, marked a serious reversal. Included in the Advisory Group are several individuals that represent strong interests for the biotechnology industry creating clear cases of conflict of interest and rendering them unacceptable members of the Group.

For example, named member to the Group, José Luis Solleiro Rebolledo is the President of AgroBIO, a biotechnology lobby group that represents corporations like Monsanto, Dupont, Aventis and Syngenta in Mexico. Two of AgroBIO's lobbying efforts focus on eliminating Mexico's moratorium on the commercial cultivation of GM crops and limiting national legislative initiatives on GM product labeling and Biosafety laws. Other Advisory Group members, like Peter H. Raven and Luis Rafael Herrera-Estrella, represent strong biotech interests, like Monsanto and Grupo Pulsar, respectively.

What can you do?

Greenpeace Mexico and Cemda (Mexican Environmental Law Center) have drafted a letter to the CEC Secretariat to protest the Advisory Group's pro-biotech composition, demanding the removal of Group members with conflict of interest, and replace them with independent scientist with experience in corn issues.

Sign the letter below and it will be faxed to the CEC Secretariat in Quebec, Canada.

Required fields are shown in bold
Name:
Organization:
Email:
Mailing Address:
City:
State:
ZIP/Postal Code:
Country:
	Add me to the GX fax alert listserve Add me to the GX mailing list
Mr. Victor Shantora Executive Director Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) This letter's intent is to congratulate the CEC for the appointing of the Advisory Group for the maize case, which, I understand will act as the scientific panel to the investigation of contaminated corn in Mexico. However, I wish to express my dissatisfaction of the Advisory Group's composition, which will work with the CEC to examine relative aspects of conservation and sustainable use of traditional maize in Mexico. It is clear the for at least 5 selected members of the Group, conflicts of interest exist. For example: -- Jose Luis Solleiro Rebolledo is currently the Technical Director of AgroBIO Mexico, A.C., a Mexican institution founded in 2000 that represents the modern biotechnology industry, focusing on the political implications of agri-biotechnology in the public and private sector. Dr. Solleiro acted as General Director of AgroBIO until at least mid 2002. AgroBIO was funded and receives financing from important national and transnational corporations like: Aventis, Dupont, Monsanto, Savia (from Grupo Pulsar) and Syngenta. I believe that with at least one third of the members of the Group representing biotech interests, or some connection to the field, the Group do not satisfy the criteria as independent experts. As the mandate of the study is to deal with scientifically establishing what the impacts of transgenic contamination of native maize varieties, corporate representatives are not appropriate representatives for consultation. Furthermore, the Advisory Group has not considered any of the initial researchers of the contamination of local corn varieties by transgenics in the states Puebla and Oaxaca case, nor has a recognized maize specialist been chosen. This to me is incongruent, considering that the study is focused on the implications of transgene presence in local maize varieties. I believe that a truly independent panel must be established to ensure that the study enjoys objectivity, credibility and legitimacy for all interested parties and be a benefit to natural resources and the conservation of biodiversity in North America. Therefore I demand that you reconsider the members of the Advisory Group and designate more appropriate members that fulfill the "independent" criteria as established in the Environmental Accord for case studies. I await your response, trusting it will reflect the historic commitment assumed by the CEC in the case of Mexican maize, given the importance this case has for the future of humanity. Sincerely,

Thank you!