LIMITED BAN The Court of Appeals has deleted Item 8 in its previous ruling on genetically modified organisms or GMOs. In its most recent decision dated Aug. 15, the court said the ban on the use, testing sale and importation of GMOs applies only to Golden Rice and Bt eggplant. 鈥擯hoto from IRRI
MANILA, Philippines 鈥� The Court of Appeals has narrowed the scope of its earlier decision on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as it clarified that the prohibition on their usage, testing, sale, or importation applied only to Golden Rice and Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) eggplant.
In a 33-page decision dated Aug. 15, the court鈥檚 Former Fourth Division removed Item (8) from its April 17 decision, which barred 鈥渁ny application for contained use, field testing, direct use as food or feed, or processing, commercial propagation and importation鈥� of GMOs until government agencies had established ways to monitor and improve risk assessments for these products.
READ: CA stops commercial growing of GMO crops
鈥淚n this case, only the circumstances, facts and issues covering Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant were considered in rendering the assailed decision,鈥� the appellate court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Jennifer Joy Ong.
It noted that other applicants for the use, testing, sale, or import of GMOs were not included in the case, depriving them of a chance to be heard.
Item 8 only
鈥淟est we be accused of violating a fundamental right (to due process), the deletion of Item (8) of the dispositive portion of the assailed decision is in order,鈥� the court said.
All other provisions of its April 17 ruling were upheld, including the issuance of a cease and desist order against the commercial propagation of GMO crops Golden Rice and Bt eggplant due to the lack of 鈥渇ull scientific certainty鈥� about their impact.
The appellate court earlier ruled in favor of the petitioners led by Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-Unlad Agrikultura (Masipag) and Greenpeace Southeast Asia, as it revoked the biosafety permits issued by the government to the University of the Philippines Los Ba帽os (UPLB) and Philippine Rice Research Institute (PRRI).
Its decision was based on the petition for writs of kalikasan and continuing mandamus with prayer for the issuance of a temporary environmental protection order originally filed by the groups before the Supreme Court on Oct. 17, 2022.
Named respondents in the petition aside from the PRRI and UPLB were the secretaries of the Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources and Department of Health; as well as the director of the DA鈥檚 Bureau of Plant Industry.
Partial reconsideration
The appellate court issued its Aug. 15 decision after the petitioners filed a motion for partial reconsideration on May 2 seeking to modify Item 8.
According to them, the Philippines imports GMOs such as yellow corn and soya meal, which are the most important ingredients in animal feeds.
In its comment, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing the respondents from the government, said that it shared the petitioners鈥� apprehension about the effects of item 8, citing 鈥渆xisting data showing that domestic food and feed industries heavily rely on the importation of GM soybean products.鈥�
The OSG emphasized that the appellate court鈥檚 directive under the said provision 鈥渉ampers the country鈥檚 efforts to provide and discover new and valuable information through scientific research and negatively impacts the country鈥檚 agricultural industry and biotechnology research.鈥�