Greenpeace, et al
won Bt Talong’s last legal battle at the appellate court level
By GREENPEACE
September 29, 2013
MANILA, Philippines –
After one year and five months of legal battle on the Writ of
Kalikasan against Bt Talong field trials, the Court of Appeals (CA)
affirmed its earlier decision that uphold the right of Filipinos to a
healthy and balanced ecology.
The 14-page CA resolution,
dated 20 September 2013, vindicated the petitioners Greenpeace and
Magsasaka at Siyentipiko sa Pagpapaunlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG)
along with 15 other individuals including former Sen. Orly Mercado and
Rep. Teddy Casiño when they won the last legal battle on the Writ of
Kalikasan on Bt Talong in the appellate level. CA upholds its decision
and affirmed the arguments raised by the petitioners.
The case filed in April 2012
has undergone a series of debates which presented scientists and
experts from both sides. In May 2013, the CA has earlier issued its
decision ordering the respondents lead by University of the
Philippines Los Baños Foundation (UPLBFI), University of the
Philippines, Los Baños (UPLB), the Department of Agriculture (DA), and
the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to
“permanently cease and desist from further conducting BT Talong field
trials” and “protect, preserve, rehabilitate and restore the
environment”.
Von Hernandez, Greenpeace
Southeast Asia Executive Director commented, "the ruling strongly
validates our position regarding the hazards of open releases of
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) such as Bt eggplant into the
environment.” He stressed that the decision also vindicates Greenpeace
against the malicious, aggressive and sustained attacks currently
being waged by GMO pushers and their propagandists against the
environmental group.
Calling on the government,
Hernandez said, “this decision should enlighten our government not to
waste public money in co-funding research on GM crops, which is not
only harmful but would only benefit the corporate patent owners of the
gene and technology. It must not also allow foreign biotechnology
firms to dominate state university research; instead, support Filipino
researchers in their work for safe, ecological and organic
agriculture.”
The respondents have filed
their motion for reconsideration in which the CA has denied and
affirmed its earlier decision. Highlights of the Court of Appeals
Resolution are:
1. University respondent,
UPLB, could not find solace in the Constitutional provision on
academic freedom. Like any other right, says CA, the right to academic
freedom ends when the overriding public welfare calls for some
restraint. It does not give UPLB unbridled freedom to conduct
experimentation, studies & research that may put to risk the health of
the people and the environment which are equally protected under our
fundamental law. The court ordered to stop the field trial, not the
research on Bt talong, and considered science creative enough to
continue the research without releasing it to the environment.
2. The testing or
introduction of Bt talong in the Philippines, by its nature and
intent, is a grave and present danger to a balanced ecology because in
any book and by any yardstick, it is an ecologically imbalancing
event. Court emphasised the "chronic harm" (harm built up over time)
that Bt talong might cause and the fact that it heard all the experts'
testimonies which failed to settle the scientific uncertainties. It
cited the study of Prof. Seralini "Food and Chemical Toxicology"
September 20, 2012 which was undisputed when presented by the justices
themselves in the hearing of experts. Hence, the proper application of
the precautionary principle.
3. Court did not find any
compelling reason in the 3 Motions for Reconsideration and 2 Replies
by respondents to reverse or modify the Court's May 17, 2013 decision.
Note that the May 17, 2013 decision granted the writs of kalikasan and
continuing mandamus on the grounds:
a) there is no scientific
consensus on the safety and impacts of Bt talong;
b) there is no Congressional
enactment that governs introduction, release, experimentation of GM
crops like Bt talong;
c) precautionary principle
is applicable in the light of uncertainties and
inadequacy/ineffectiveness or current regulatory system; and,
d) Bt talong, with its
social, economic and environmental impacts, should not be entrusted to
scientists only but should also involve all stakeholders.
Atty. Zelda Soriano,
Political Advisor, Greenpeace Southeast Asia and lead counsel for the
Writ of Kalikasan, emphasized the need for the respondents DENR and DA
to prepare an immediate plan of action to rehabilitate the field trial
sites and protect, preserve and conserve the environment as ordered by
the court.
Soriano said, “it is also
within the mandate of the departments of environment, agriculture and
health to recommend policies and measures to reform the present
regulatory process found by the court as incapable, ineffective, and
inadequate to protect the constitutional rights of the Filipinos to
health and balanced ecology. All of these, however, must be done in
consultation and collaboration with stakeholders.”