Niveau juridique : Union européenne
Texte de la question du 7 décembre 2018
« In a judgment of 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that ‘new breeding techniques’ are genetically modified organisms and are therefore covered by Directive 2001/18/EC.
This judgment has significant implications.
On 30 October 2018, a group of third countries raised the detection and trade problems that ensue from the judgment in a letter to the World Trade Organisation.
On 13 November 2018, the Commission’s Group of Chief Scientific Advisors published a short statement.
1. Will the Commission ask the Group of Chief Scientific Advisors to draw up a scientific opinion?
2. Following the judgment of the Court of Justice, does the Commission still regard the EU definition of ‘genetically modified organism’ as being compatible with the definition of ‘living modified organism’ in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
3. If the Court of Justice’s ruling leads to a discrepancy between these two definitions that has operational consequences, how will the Commission address it? »
Texte de la réponse (11/02/2019)
« 1. The Group of Chief Scientific Advisors issued in 2017 an explanatory note describing the nature and characteristics of new breeding techniques and their similarities and differences compared to conventional techniques and established techniques of genetic modification(1). This note, requested by the Commission, contributed significantly to the general scientific understanding and the debate on new breeding techniques. The recent statement of the Chief Scientific Advisors(2) also feeds into the ongoing discussions on new techniques. The Commission is now considering the need to consult the European Food Safety Authority regarding the applicability of current risk assessment guidance to products obtained with new mutagenesis techniques. At this point in time, the Commission is not planning to request a follow up to the previous explanatory note of the Group of Chief Scientific Advisors on new breeding techniques.
2 and 3. The Parties to the Cartagena Protocol can apply more stringent rules than those of the Protocol insofar as they are consistent with its objectives and provisions and in accordance with international law. The Commission considers that the Genetically Modified Organisms definition in the EU legislation fulfils these requirements and, therefore, does not see the need for action in this respect. »