The Court of Appeals (CA) has issued a cease-and-desist order against the commercial propagation of Bt eggplant and Golden Rice by the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) and the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PRRI).
In a 143-page decision dated April 17, 2024, the CA’s Fourth Division granted the petition filed by Greenpeace Southeast Asia and the Magsasaka At Siyentipiko para sa Pag-Unlad ng Agrikultura (Masipag) seeking the issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan against UPLB and PRRI.
The appellate court also directed Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Environment and Natural Resource (DENR), Department of Health (DOH), and the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) to strengthen risk assessment procedures and promulgate mechanisms for the monitoring of all activities conducted under the rules governing applications involving genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
In the same ruling, the CA also enjoined any and all applications for contained use, field testing, direct use as food or feed, or processing, commercial propagation, and importation of GMOs until it said the government has addressed and strengthened the risk assessment and monitoring procedures mandated in accordance with the decision.
The PRRI filed an application with BPI on February 28, 2017 to conduct field trials for Golden Rice. Also on the same date, PRRI and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) filed with the BPI an application for the direct use as food, feed or for processing of the said GMO product.
The said applications were opposed by Greenpeace, Masipag, and several other groups.
Despite the opposition, the BPI issued a consolidated report for a field trial off Golden Rice, and on May 20, 2019, it approved the issuance of a Biosafety Permit for such a field trial.
In its April 17 ruling, the CA held that there is a lack of “full scientific certainty” on the effects—good or bad—of GMO products and that evidence presented before it necessitates the application of the “precautionary principle.”
“The precautionary principle bridges the gap in cases where scientific certainty in factual findings cannot be achieved,” read the CA ruling penned by Associate Justice Jennifer Joy Ong and concurred with by Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Jr. and Geraldine Fiel Macaraig.
The appellate court added that it found that the three conditions for the precautionary principle—uncertainty, the possibility of irreversible harm, and the possibility of serious harm—are present in the instant case.
It also said that while there is comprehensive literature showing that GMO foods are safe, there are also independent studies and anecdotes showing why it cannot rule out the possible serious risks, as well as adverse and unintended effects of Golden Rice and Bt eggplant.
The appellate court also found that “the BPI and the other concerned government agencies have unlawfully neglected to perform their duty of conducting monitoring activities, which is essential to risk assessment.”
“It must be stressed that monitoring of GMO activities by the government cannot be taken lightly. It is not an empty formality that can be disregarded or passed on to others. Proper monitoring is a crucial part of risk assessment as it is one of the means to determine the possible impacts and effects of GMO on the people and environment,” the CA said further.
Lastly, the CA ruled that until the deficiencies noted in the decision are addressed by the concerned government agencies, any application for contained use, field testing, direct use as food or feed, or processing, commercial propagation, and importation of all GMOs are enjoined.