In view of the meeting of the Council Working Party on Genetic Resources and Innovation in Agriculture scheduled for 20 January, on Tuesday 7 January the Polish Presidency of the EU Council drafted a compromise text on the proposal governing the use of new genomic techniques (NGT). This text aims to resolve the problem of patents on these plants.
“The aim is to find a qualified majority”, according to a note from the Polish Presidency. The EU Council has still not managed to find a common position on this text, unlike the European Parliament (see EUROPE 13542/7).
The proposed text provides for an “additional labelling requirement” for reproductive material of category 1 NGT plants (similar to conventional plants) that are protected by a patent (as well as the inclusion of this information in the commercial documentation of this material and in the databases where it is offered for sale and in the catalogues of varieties).
The requirement to include this information “is provided in order to ensure traceability, transparency and choice for breeders using NGT 1 plant reproductive material in breeding programmes and will distinguish between patented and non-patented NGT 1 plant reproductive material”, according to the proposed text.
In certain cases (the placing on the market of category 1 plant reproductive material protected by a patent), it may be necessary for Member States “to take appropriate measures on their territory to prevent the unintended use of patented category 1 plant reproductive material for cultivation in all or part of their territory, for reasons related to the socioeconomic impact of the presence of patented plant reproductive material on the market on the breeding sector and agricultural policy objectives”, according to the text.
As regards patents, the Polish Presidency wants to “avoid a change in patent law”, according to Testbiotech. However, according to the organisation, “this amendment is necessary to restrict the ongoing concentration process in the seed market”.
Poland suggests that companies should not file patents if they want their plants to benefit from NGT 1 status. Furthermore, patented seeds from NGT 1 plants could still be placed on the market if they were labelled (‘patent protected’ or ‘patent pending’). Member States could then take measures to restrict or prohibit the use of NGT 1 patented seeds for cultivation (but not for the marketing of products intended for human or animal consumption), Testbiotech explains.
“The proposal seems to be in conflict with basic principles of non-discrimination”, according to Testbiotech, which believes that the Polish proposal could create “unjustified discrimination” between patented NGTs and patented conventional crops.
Testbiotech regrets the weakness of the proposal and prefers the compromise put forward by the Belgian Presidency of the Council, under which NGT 1 status was granted only if no patent was filed. “NGT 1 plants can be patented and the burden is put onto Member States to prohibit their cultivation. This no solution to the ongoing concentration and monopolisation in the seed market”, asserts Testbiotech. Many legal and political problems for Member States are likely to result from this proposal, according to the organisation.
With regard to risk assessment and equivalence criteria for NGT 1 plants, the Polish Presidency, according to Testbiotech, “is still following the wrong idea that there might be a general threshold for effects caused by NGT processes, that would not correspond to substantial risks”. However, numerous publications show that there is no such threshold, argues Testbiotech.
Link to the compromise proposal: https://aeur.eu/f/eyf
Link to the note: https://aeur.eu/f/eyh (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)