FARMERS all over the world were never posed to such a grave danger. The Trans-national Corporations were never so outrageous in defying the'people'. It was an apprehension for long that the rather privileged growth of the Trans-national Corporations will someday give rise to an unpleasant paradox - a world of sovereign states ruled by tax paying corporations. It is now time to have a look in to the situation. Two recent incidents raised the question that how long we can allow the hydra-growth of corporations.
One of them started in Sri Lanka when couple of weeks ago the Sri Lankan Government among very few others took initiative to prevent it's citizens from the probable health risk of GMO ingredients in food items. The impacts of GMOs'(Genetically Modified Organisms) on human body are not though yet well defined, the balance is on the negative side. Scientists all over the world are warning against the human intervention in to the course of nature. The economic and legal impact of GMOs are, on the other hand, quite clear, it will undoubtedly allow the Trans-National Corporations, like 'Monsanto' to monopolize the whole industry of agriculture.
The intention of the Sri Lankan people is quite clear from the very language of the law which starts by saying "No person shall import any food contain any material or ingredient that has been subjected to genetic modification", and there is a very precise definition in the law of what they mean by genetic modification. The law meant that from now on no TNCs (Trans National Corporations) are allowed to export any food to Sri Lanka containing GMOs as per the definition given. the law came into operation on lst May 2001. it was certainly a light of hope for the'people'in contrast with the corporate world and especially for the third world poor countries, which were in recent years so cornered by these giant TNCs whose yearly turnovers are many times bigger then the annual budget of many of those countries. Sri Lankan Government was hailed by the people and peoples'rights group from the whole world.
The corporate hydra reacted immediately through the machinery of the USA government; the USA Government just a week later the law came in to force took the matter to the WTO (World Trade Organisation). The international trade and commerce are now mostly governed by the GATT/WTO regime in connection with some other international treaties and conventions. The USA lodged a complaint with the WTO following the Sri Lankan ban on GMOs. The WTO has now called upon the Sri Lankan Government to justify the Ban. Under the WTO it is now up to the Sri Lankan Government to furnish evidence that the ban was justified on certain limited grounds of public health etc. that are set out in the conventions (mainly the Convention on Biological Diversity, CBD and the Bio-Safety Protocol).
Another very interesting drama took place in the other side of the world, in Canada. Schmeiser, a 70 year-old farmer from Saskatchewan, had no intention of growing Monsanto's genetically engineered canola, but pollen from a neighboring farm drifted and propagated on his farm. Monsanto brought Schmeiser to court because he did not enter an agreement to pay patent royalties to Monsanto for growing the GE crop. Under the court's judgement, Schmeiser is required to pay Monsanto about $10, 000 in user fees, and up to $75. 000 in profits from his 1998 crop.
The verdict from the Schmeiser case carries serious implications for farmers worldwide, where over 44 million hectares (about 109 million acres) were used to plant GE crops in 2000. With the rise in patents over crops and seeds, the global food supply is increasingly falling into the control of powerful agribusiness and biotech companies. In addition, the private ownership of seeds abolishes farmers' fundamental rights to save and reuse seeds. Instead, farmers must pay royalties to biotech companies for planting their seeds. In Schmeisers words: Basically, the right to use our own seed has been taken away. "
If the biotech companies have their way, their monopolistic property rights over biotech seeds would extend to farmers all over the world. The economic, social, cultural and ecological impacts of such monopolistic control by biotech companies would be devastating in the developing world, where farmers have been exchanging, saving and reusing seeds for centuries.
In the meantime, Schmeiser must find a way to pay Monsanto exorbitant amounts of money for the contamination of his crop by Monsanto's GE canola. After the court decision, he was quoted as saying: "It will take totally all of my wife's and myselfs retirement funds that we've worked for all our life. I've lost 50 years of work because of a company's genetically altered seed getting into my canola, destroying what I've worked for, destroying my property and getting sued on top it'.
Given these facts and the accumulating evidence of the risks and hazards of GMOs, the option of a moratorium or a ban on the planting of GE (genetically engineered) crops (whether commercially or for field trials) and the release of any GE organism from strict laboratory containment in each country and worldwide is the only logical option. In almost all developing countries, agriculture production is currently GE-free and free of intellectual property rights constraints. Keeping this status is absolutely crucial to protect the right of farmers to keep and re-use seeds, as well as to ensure food security, environmental stability and food safety.
The crisis relating the Sri Lankan ban on GMOs is at the same time a unique opportunity for the environment activists. Surely the advancement was more than expectation in this region and engaged the young movement to protect farmers'rights in a decisive battle.
This one is going to be a test case for it's type in term of the legal technicalities of the WTO set up, but what will be our role, role of the people at large in this crisis?
Another thing is important to relate the issue with the Canadian Monsanto V. Schmeiser case. The sensitivity of the corporate world and their razor sharp reactions has at last unveiled their war fronts against people. This reality has great potentials as they are sending clear message to people, whose sovereignty has been attacked, at least conceptually, by this challenge made to Sri Lankan government. Fairness neither applies nor is even relevant in discussion of business, politics or for that matter nature itself.
For an economic unit as a corporation to be greedy is really to our advantage. Then at least we understand each other and what the corporation is trying to do. Then we make the laws, democratically of course, which are the rules under which they operate.
Our governments were designed to protect their citizens. Is it not the right moment for us to take a right move to save ourselves from a 'Wellsean' paradox?
