[ad_1]
<! –
->
<! –
->
The Supreme Court rejected an attempt by the Ghana National Association of Farmers and Fishermen (GNAFF) to overturn a recent High Court ruling in the ongoing legal battle against GMOs.
The highest court in the country ruled that the High Court was right in a ruling made in May 2019 to be competent to continue hearing the case.
The original case was pending before the High Court of the Division of Human Rights in Accra since February 2015, when it was first filed by a civil society group, Food Sovereignty. Ghana, and three other groups.
Among other things, they seek to declare that the ongoing marketing processes of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) by various government agencies are illegal.
According to court documents cited by Joy News, the plaintiffs claim to be declared that the government has not met the legal requirements required by the 2011 law on biosafety to authorize the release and marketing of GMOs.
They also wish to declare that the National Biosafety Committee (a temporary but now defunct committee, which approved trials on GMOs of cowpea, rice and cotton prior to the creation of the National Authority Biosecurity) can not approve the release and commercialization of GMOs in accordance with the provisions of the Biosafety Act.
The GNAFF raised a number of objections to the High Court, notably to argue that the lawsuit was premature, as the biosafety law allowed the grievance processes to of the council and the court of appeal.
According to the GNAFF, without exhausting these procedures, the High Court should not be entertaining itself. But the High Court disagreed and ruled that the case could continue.
The GNAFF then went to the Supreme Court to overturn the High Court's decision, but the judges of the highest court in the country supported the position of the lower court. GNAFF lawyer Bright Okyere-Adjekum subsequently withdrew his application even before the Supreme Court could rule.
Dziwornu, who represented the GNAFF, said that after the decision, they will now return to pursue the case on the merits before the High Court. "I'm happy, the Supreme Court justices are very fair, they have given us the opportunity to present problems in a way that nobody can discuss again …", he told the media.
He added that, despite the fact that the judgment is not favorable to them, they are about to return to the High Court to prove that the judiciary has no illegal activities that prohibit ongoing projects. introduction of GMOs in the country.
"It's still in the process. I do not see anything new in the Supreme Court decision. We were already in the High Court. We will go back to defend the real case here …. And we will win a win for farmers so that they can grow GMOs, "said Dziwornu.
George Tetteh Wayoe, a lawyer for Food Sovereignty in Ghana (FSG), is also confident that Tuesday's decision is a sign of better days for his team.
"We are pleased with this decision of the court. This reinforces our case. He tells the world that the Ghana court is ready to examine genetic engineering. Do not let us downplay this action, "he told Joy News.
In their 2015 statement of claim, anti-GM groups insisted that ongoing processes to market GMOs violated the country's laws, saying the government had outright disregarded the 2011 biosecurity law. .
Ghana's third political party, the Convention People's Party, the Ghana Vegetarian Association and another group of farmers joined FSG.
Four different government agencies, including the biotech regulator, the National Biosafety Authority, have been questioned. The court allowed the GNAFF to join the defense after asking to be included to defend the farmers' position.
The plaintiffs argued before the High Court cited by Joy News in court documents that there was no pre-trial risk badessment for GMO crops which they say makes the process illegal.
They also stated that there was no appropriate structure when confined field trials of genetically modified crops started and that these crops will pollute and endanger the environment. They also claimed that genetic engineering would seriously affect foods consumed by the general public.
But the GNAFF insisted in its counter-declaration that GMOs have considerable potential to improve agricultural productivity and a decision to ban them will have a negative impact on farmers and fishermen and, by extension, on their economic and livelihood rights. social.
Farmers claim that biotechnology, as a tool for improving agricultural productivity, complies with Article 36 (2) of the 1992 constitution which enjoins the state to take appropriate measures to promote the development of agriculture and industry.
Lawyer Tetteh Wayoe told Joy News that they are appearing in court because they are convinced that GMOs are not good for the country. "Ghana should be grateful to the complainants.
Posterity will judge us and tell us that the steps are in order. If we sit in our country and technology comes in and we all sit, then we are not proactive. But if part of the population says no, that's a problem for us, so we're going to court, that's the way forward, "he said.
But Dziwornu said that the fact that Ghana authorizes the introduction of GMOs would be in the country's interest and warns against frustration of the process. "Already, the structures are in place; we are doing field trials on rice, cowpea and cotton.
So we fight for farmers. There are national institutions that do the testing. We do not expect large multinationals to badume our food sovereignty or our means of production, "he said.
"In Nigeria, they have made progress in ongoing field work. So why can not we do that? Will we stay out of the way and allow others to take over our farming, "Dziwornu asked.
The parties are scheduled to appear before the High Court on Thursday at the resumption of the hearing on the case.
Samia Nkrumah, former presidential candidate of the CPP, called on the government to revoke the authorization given to GM crop trials in the country's interest.
[ad_2]
Source link
