February 19, 2002

A huge controversy has erupted over evidence that the Mesoamerican Center of Genetic Diversity is contaminated with genetically modified (GM) maize material. Two respected scientists are under global attack and the peer-review process of a major scientific publication is being threatened. There is infighting at the Mexican ministries of environment and agriculture, and intergovernmental organizations and international scientific institutes are squabbling over methodologies rather than carrying out their mandates.

Background: It all began with an article in Nature last September reporting on the findings of Mexico's Ministry of the Environment that extensive GM maize contamination had been found in farmers' varieties in two states. In November, a peer-reviewed article, also in Nature, by Dr. Ignacio Chapela and graduate student David Quist at the Berkeley campus of the University of California, offered scientific evidence of the Mexican contamination. A subsequent story in Nature Biotechnology reported that the Berkeley scientists had unconfirmed preliminary indications that GM pollution may have seeped into the world's most important maize gene bank. At a workshop on January 23rd hosted by civil society organizations in Mexico, the country's environment ministry presented a study that revealed that GM contamination of farmers' varieties of maize had been found at contamination rates of up to 35% in remote villages in Oaxaca and Puebla. The findings were jointly prepared by the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, the National Institute of Ecology, and the National Commission on Biodiversity.

Pro-industry and pro-GM academics went ballistic. News that a Center of Genetic Diversity had been polluted with GM traits could crush industry hopes that the European Union would end its de facto GM moratorium in March. Industry is also concerned that the April meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity would quash global labeling pressures and Mexico's specific calls for compensatory mechanisms for biotech accidents. Civil Society and CIMMYT Exchange: On February 6th, many of the leading Farmers' and other Civil Society Organizations attending the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre Brazil joined together to write to Jacques Diouf, the Director-General of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Ian Johnson, the World Bank Vice-President who chairs the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) to ask them to call for a moratorium on the shipment of GM seed or grain into their Centers of Genetic Diversity. The letters were in part prompted by telephone and e-mail discussions with Dr. Tim Reeves, the Director-General of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) - one of the 16 CGIAR "Green Revolution" centers. Although Reeves cautioned that the methodology supporting the contamination studies was under attack - and that three rounds of investigation at CIMMYT had revealed no contamination of their maize gene bank, he did agree that there was GM contamination in Mexico and that it would be only a matter of time before contamination reached the gene banks. Reeves also volunteered that his comments could be quoted. Since then, the CIMMYT director has expressed his regret that CSOs did not wait for clarification on the issues of methodology before writing to FAO and CGIAR, but he has stood by the two main points: there is contamination in a Center of Genetic Diversity, and it is only a matter of time before that contamination reaches into the gene bank - if it hasn't already occurred. Industry's strategy: CIMMYT could hardly be described as anti-GM. It has the premiere biotech programme within the CGIAR. Why then are some scientists and institutions attacking the findings of the Government of Mexico and the Berkeley scientists? It would seem to be a project doomed to failure since regardless of the methodologies involved - no serious scientist can really dispute the contamination? Three reasons make short-term gain for long-term problems a reasonable strategy for supporters of industry:

1. Damage control in Europe and Brazil: The world's biggest non-GM consumer of agricultural imports is still tottering uncertainly on the issue of genetic modification. The more anti-GM activists can be attacked or discredited the better industry's chances will be to win an end to the de facto moratorium when EU Heads of State gather in Barcelona March 15-16. Meanwhile, Brazil - the world's largest non-GM exporter - has been making loud pro-GM noises. Concerns about environmental damage in Mesoamerica readily translate into Brazilian alarm about damage to the Amazon. As with Europe, the Mexican scandal is bad news for biotech in Brazil.

2. Biosafety Protocol containment: When the world's environmental ministries gather in The Hague (April 8-26), Terminator technology and the Biosafety Protocol are high on the agenda. The Protocol emphasizes the special role of Centers of Origin and Centers of Genetic Diversity. Unless they can keep doubts circulating as to whether or not Mesoamerica is contaminated, there could be an irresistible pressure for a moratorium and for industry to foot the bill for clean up.

3. Academic intimidation: The Biotech industry has been hurt by the scientific reports of respected academics such as Dr. Arpad Pusztai and now Ignacio Chapela and David Quist (authors of the Berkeley study). Pusztai (formerly employed at the Rowett Institute in Edinburgh, UK) published a study revealing that GM potatoes fed to lab rats interfered with their growth, organ development, and immune systems.) They got Pusztai temporarily muzzled and fired, and they want to do the same to Chapela and Quist - as a warning to any other academics who break ranks over GM research. Pro-industry academics are engaging in a highly unethical mud-slinging campaign against the Berkeley researchers.

Given the stakes, the biotech industry's desperate attempts to cloud and confuse the scandal is not surprising. If EU Heads of State drop their moratorium in March and the Biodiversity Convention skates clear in April without demands for contamination compensation, then whatever bad news comes down in May is manageable.

CIMMYT's role: What is harder to understand is the silence of CIMMYT and the entire CGIAR. Hiding behind a debate they themselves understand to be irrelevant on methodologies of GM detection, the Center that sees itself mandated to conserve maize genetic diversity has failed to state firmly and publicly what they believe to be the truth - that there is contamination in the field and there will be (or is already) contamination in gene banks. Without taking sides or even entering into the methodologies debate, CIMMYT must do what its mandate demands - state the reality as they believe it to be and announce the steps they are taking - and think others should take - to conserve diversity and safeguard farmers. Anything less is corporate complicity and totally unacceptable.

We call upon CIMMYT to:

• Publicly acknowledge that GM maize contamination has taken place in Mesoamerica;
• Confirm that under present circumstances the operational assumption has to be that GM maize contamination in gene banks is inevitable;

We call upon FAO to:

• Ensure that the Code of Conduct on Biotechnology which is currently under development, incorporate mechanisms to control the diffusion of GM materials to vulnerable regions and to guarantee that the burden of ecosystem restoration and farmer and national compensation rests with those who pollute.

We call upon CGIAR and FAO together to:

• Review the current FAO-CGIAR Trust Agreement to ensure that the integrity of germplasm held in Trust is protected and that there are no intellectual property claims pertaining to any of the germplasm;
• Recommend steps to safeguard local farmers' varieties and gene banks.
• Propose an immediate moratorium on the shipment of GM seed or grain in countries or regions that form part of the Centre of Origin or Centre of Genetic Diversity for the species.

We call upon Academia and the Private Industry to:

• Renounce immediately the use of intimidator tactics to silence potentially 'dissident' scientists. We call upon the scientific community to publicly support the academic freedom of scientists whose studies conflict with the interests of industry and to censor those academics and institutions that slander the competence or integrity of those who publish peer-reviewed studies.

We request that the Sixth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity meeting in The Hague, Netherlands April 8-26 place the issue of the GM contamination of Centers of Origin or of Genetic Diversity on its agenda for urgent debate and that the World Food Summit Five Years Later, taking place in Rome from June 6-13 also place this issue on its agenda.

Signatories to this statement include:

FOOD FIRST

GRUPO ETC (formerly RAFI)

LA VIA CAMPESINA

RED POR UNA AMERICA LATINA LIBRE DE TRANSGENICOS

SUE EDWARDS AND DR. TEWOLDE EGZIABHER,
INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, ADDIS ABEBA, ETIOPIA

DR. BEATRIX TAPPESER
INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED ECOLOGY, ALEMANIA

BRIAN TOKAR
INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL ECOLOGY

HECTOR MAGALLON
GREENPEACE MƒXICO

DOREEN STABINSKY
GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL

RYAN ZINN
GLOBAL EXCHANGE

FERNANDO BEJARANO
RED DE ACCION SOBRE PLAGUICIDAS Y ALTERNITIVAS, MƒXICO

INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, ESLOVENIA

DR. HANS R. HERREN, DIRECTOR GENERAL
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE OF INSECT PHYSIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY

PATRICK MULVANY
FOOD SECURITY POLICY ADVISER

ACTION RESOURCE CENTER

MARGARET WEBER
ADRIAN DOMINICAN SISTERS

LARRY J. GOODWIN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR ORGANIZING
AFRICA FAITH & JUSTICE NETWORK

ALLIANCE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE ORGANISATIONS IN ANDHRA PRADESH
CONVENOR: K. PANDU DORA

CONNY ALMEKINDERS

DR. RAUL HERNANDEZ GARCIADIEGO
ALTERNATIVES AND PROCESSES FOR SOCIAL PARTICIPATION
ANTHRA, INDIA

R†DIGER STEGEMANN
ASSOCIATION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF CROP DIVERSITY

PAUL NICHOLSON
UNION DE CAMPESINOS VASCOS

ELVA FRANCO
RED DE SEMILLAS DEL PAIS VASCO

MARGRIET ZOETHOUT
BOTH ENDS/ ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICE FOR NGOS

VORSITZENDER HUBERT WEINZIER
BUND NATURSCHUTZ, ALEMANIA

UTE R...NNEBECK
BUNDESARBEITSGEMEINSCHAFT DER EVANGELISCHEN JUGEND IM L€NDLICHEN RAUM, ALEMANIA

KARSTEN WOLFF, CONSULTANT FOR PUBLIC RELATIONS
BUKO AGRO COORDINATION

DR. NARCISO BARRERA-BASSOLS, Holanda

GƒRARD CHOPIN, COORDINATOR
COORDINATION PAYSANNE EUROPENE

BEVERLY BELL
CENTER FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE, ESTADOS UNIDOS

CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS PARA EL CAMBIO EN EL CAMPO MEXICANO (CECCAM), MƒXICO

CLEAN WATER ACTION
LINDA SETCHELL

CHRISTINE ANDELA
COASAD CENTRAL AFRICA COORDINATION, çFRICA

MARIO SALERNO HEAD OF THE HORTICULTURE SECTION
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, GUZE MICALLEF, MALTA

ANGELICA CIBRIAN, GRADUATE FELLOW
CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND CONSERVATION COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, ESTADOS UNIDOS

DAVID PIMENTEL, UNIVERSIDAD DE CORNELL, ITHACA, NY, ESTADOS UNIDOS

DIANA LUQUE, MEXICO

RONALD NIGH, PRESIDENTE
DANA, A.C.

URSULA OSWALD
DESARROLLO ALTERNATIVO, A.C., MƒXICO

DIVERSE WOMEN FOR DIVERSITY

HUGO PERALES
DEPARTAMENTO DE AGROECOLOGIA, EL COLEGIO DE LA FRONTERA SUR, MƒXICO

ETIENNE VERNET
ECOROPA, FRANCIA

LOTTE ASVELD
EURODUSNIE, ANARCHIST COLLECTIVE/POLITICAL CENTRE

EKOGAIA FOUNDATION

JAVIER M. CLAPAROLS, DIRECTOR
ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY, FILIPINAS

DR. M. ADETOLA BADEJO
ENPROCT RESEARCH GROUP

BOGDAN PARANICI, PRESIDENT
THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION TER, RUMANIA

MAITE ARISTEGI, GENERAL SECRETARY, ENRIKE GISASOLA, UNION MEMBER RESPONSIBLE FOR GENETIC ENGINEERING ISSUES, AND HELEN GROOME, TECHNICAL ADVISOR ON GENETIC ENGINEERING ISSUES
EHNE: BASQUE FARMERS' UNION , PAÍS VASCO

BERHAN G. EGZIABHER, GENERAL MANAGER
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AUTHORITY, ETIOPÍA

BETH BURROWS, PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR
THE EDMONDS INSTITUTE, ESTADOS UNIDOS

PAT MOONEY
ETC GROUP

HERBERT LOHNER, PROJEKTREFERENT
FRIENDS OF THE EARTH GERMANY - BERLIN BRANCH, ALEMANIA

FELIPE MONTOYA, PH.D., DIRECTOR
FUNDACIîN MILPA (MISIîN DE INTERCAMBIO ENTRE LABRADORES PARA EL AMBIENTE)

FEDERATION OF INDONESIAN PEASANT UNION (FSPI), INDONESIA

PETER ROSSET
FOOD FIRST/ INSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY , USA

GREEN PARTY OF SOUTH AFRICA , SUDçFRICA

GESTION AMBIENTAL COMUNITARIA PARA LA CONSERVACION DE LA BIODIVERSIDAD
PROYECTOS DE DESARROLLO SIERRA NORTE DE OAXACA A.C., MƒXICO

GIRIJANA DEEPIKA ADIVASI PEOPLES ORGANIZATION , INDIA

CATARINA ILLSLEY, COORDINADORA GENERAL
GRUPO DE ESTUDIOS AMBIENTALES A.C. , MƒXICO

ANDREA CARMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
INTERNATIONAL INDIAN TREATY COUNCIL, INDIA

CHELA VAZQUEZ
INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE AND TRADE POLICY

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES' BIODIVERSITY NETWORK (IPBN), INTERNATIONAL

TEJO WAHYU JATMIKO (EXCECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
KONPHALINDO (NATIONAL CONSORTIUM FO FOREST AND NATURE CONCERVATION IN INDONESIA), INDONESIA

ASOCIACION KECHUA-AYAMARA "ANDES", PERU

ALEJANDRO NADAL, MƒXICO

ORGANIC FARMERS ASSOCIATION CENTRAL ESLOVENIA

SIMON HARRIS
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION

ORGANIC AGRICULTURE ASSOCIATION, ALABANIA

ELLEN HICKEY
PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK NORTEAMƒRICA

YEOH J. K., GE CAMPAIGN RESEARCH OFFICER
PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK ASIA AND THE PACIFIC (PAN AP), ASIA

ROMEO F. QUIJANO, M.D., PRESIDENT
PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK, FILIPINAS

WALAIPORN OD-OMPANICH
RURAL RECONSTRUCTION ALUMNI AND FRIENDS ASSOCIATION,RRAFA

ANA MARÍA ACEVEDO TOVAR
RED CIN SUDAMƒRICA

DR UMA SHANKARI
RASHTRIYA RAITHU SEVA SAMITHI

DR.AGR. FRIEDRICH MUMM VON MALLINCKRODT
SARD PRIZE AWARD

SZYMON SIENIARSKI
SOCIAL ECOLOGICAL INSTITUTE

GILLIAN KERCHHOFF, NATIONAL COORDINATOR
SAFEAGE

ANDREW TAYNTON
SAFE FOOD COALITION, SUDçFRICA IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE NATURAL LAW PARTY

JASON BOEHK
SARASOTA ALLIANCE FOR SAFE FOODS

INGER K€LLANDER, PRESIDENT
SWEDISH ECOLOGICAL FARMERS ASSOCIATION , SUECIA

UNION OF SLOVENIAN ORGANIC FARMERS ASSOCIATIONS

UMANITERA, ESLOVENIA

RORY SHORT, SUDçFRICA

RURAL VERMONT

CLARA INES NICHOLLS ,RESEARCH FELLOW, INSECT BIOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, ESTADOS UNIDOS

RAINER ENGELS, COORDINATOR
WORKING GROUP ON AGRICULTURE AND NUTRITION OF THE GERMAN NGO-FORUM ENVIRONMENT & DEVELOPMENT

WYTZE DE LANGE
XMINUSY SOLIDARITYFUNDS

YAKSHI, INDIA