• No results found

The main changes between pre-2003 and post-2003 legislative framework

Chapter 3 Regulatory Regime for Genetically Modified Organisms in the European

3.4 The Regulation on GM Food and Feed

3.4.6 The main changes between pre-2003 and post-2003 legislative framework

The year of 2003 could be seen as milestone in the development of EU’s legislation on GM food and feed. There are great changes and improvement contributed by the two regulations enacted in 2003. To start with, the GM food and feed were regulated in a single and specialized regulatory framework. Before 2003 the GM food was regulated as novel food, the feed which consist of or contains GMOs was generally regulated under the Deliberate Release Directive while the feed directly produced from GMOs was not covered by the legislation for GMOs.191 Secondly, EU completed the centralized authorization procedure for GM food and feed which under the former system the EU was only partly involved in the procedure. If the result of the assessment which was carried out by one competent authority of one Member State granted the GM food and feed to be placed on the market, and within certain period of time there was no comments received from the European Commission or other Member States, the application would be approved. However, based on the centralized authorization procedure, the European Commission is involved in the whole process of every single case.192 Moreover, the role of the EFSA in the assessment and evaluation was greatly enhanced. Before 2003, the competent authority of one Member State was in charge of processing the scientific evaluation. In case the

189  Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, Art 12(2) and Art 24(2). In case of a GMO that has not yet been authorized, a presence of 

5%  maximum  is  considered  not  to  constitute  an  infringement  provided  that  this  GMO  has  benefited  from  a  favourable  opinion from the Community Scientific Committee or the European Food Safety Authority before the date of application of  Regulation (EC) 1829/2003, Art 47. 

190  Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, Art 12(3). 

191  European  Commission  Evaluation  of  the  EU  legislative  framework  in  the  field  of  GM  food  and  feed  (2010)  DG  SANCO 

Evaluation Framework Contract Lot3 (Food Chain) p.15 

9

Member States objected, the scientific evaluation would have to be carried out by the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Union. After 2003 the EFSA was designed to independently complete all the scientific assessments.193

Furthermore, the labelling requirements of GM food product was used to be provided by the Regulation (EC) No 1139/98194 and Regulation (EC) No 49/2000195 while labelling

requirement for GM feed or for food and feed produced from GMOs was absent.196 The fourth

main development after 2003 is that the labelling requirements have been systematized and applicable to all food and feed consisting, containing of or produced from GMOs. and a tolerance threshold was introduced into the system allowing unintended and technically unavoidable presence of GMOs. and finally, before the year of 2003 there was no requirement for the submission and validation of detection method included in the legal regulation at the EU level. After the Regulation No 641/2004197 and Regulation No 1981/2006198 came into force, applications for authorization should include the detection methods and identification of transformation event and control samples of the food and animal feed which must be validated by the Community Reference Laboratory before the authorization.199

3.5 Multi-Level Governance of GMOs in the EU

It is increasingly difficult to identify clear lines dividing national from European Union competences.200 The EU has always been characterized by its multi-level governance, in which

193  Ibid. 

194  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1139/98  of  26  May  1998  concerning  the  compulsory  indication  of  the  labelling  of  certain 

foodstuffs produces from genetically modified organism of particulars other than those provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC. 

195  Commission Regulation (EC) No 49/2000 of 10 January 2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1139/98 concerning 

the compulsory indication on the labelling of certain foodstuffs produced form genetically modified organisms of particulars  other than those provided for in Directive 79/112/EEC. 

196  European  Commission  Evaluation  of  the  EU  legislative  framework  in  the  field  of  GM  food  and  feed  (2010)  DG  SANCO 

Evaluation Framework Contract Lot3 (Food Chain) p.15 

197  Commission Regulation (EC) No 641/2004 of 4 April 2004 on detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 

1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the application for the authorization of new genetically  modified  food  and  feed,  the  notification  of  existing  products  and  adventitious  or  technically  unavoidable  presense  of  genetically modified material which has benefited from a favourable risk evaluation. 

198  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1981/2006 of 22 December 2006 on detailed rules for the implementation of Article 32 

of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1829/2003  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  the  Community  reference  laboratory for genetically modified organisms. 

199  European Commission Evaluation of the EU legislative framework in the field of GM food and feed (2010) DG SANCO 

Evaluation Framework Contract Lot3 (Food Chain) p.15 

9

authority is not allocated in a straightforward way to either the EU or the Member States. Instead, authority is dispersed along a spectrum of more or less national-centralized control. Multi-level governance calls on institutions that enable collaboration, learning, and discussion in order to escape the limited solutions or deadlocks that occur when using harder-edged techniques of law and government.201 Multi-level governance is not straightforward in respect

of GMOs, however, the classic mechanisms of multi-level governance are present in the regulatory framework for GMOs. The regulation of GMOs provides plenty of opportunities for different levels of governance to intervene in decision-making, and the legislative framework generally avoids recourse to single levels of authority, as well as building in opportunities for early discussion. For example, the centralization implies by the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in assessing risk is mediated by obligations of networking and consultation with national authorities, and special obligations of transparency in respect of disagreement.

The above sections introduced the comprehensive legal framework in the EU regarding to the authorization, traceability and labelling of GMOs. The Food and Feed Regulation provided legal basis for regulating the food, food ingredients, and containing, consisting of or produced from GMOs and it also regulates GMOs used as source material for food and feed production, for example the cultivation. The Deliberate Release Directive regulates all kinds of GMOs, in comparing to the GM food and feed, the Directive focus more on the cultivation of GM plants. The aim of the authorization procedure set out by both pieces of acts is to the products in questions placed on the market would not have adverse effect on human and animal health as well as the environment. From this perspective, the center of the authorization is the risk assessment based on the scientific evidence that every authorization should be justified on the ground of scientific assessment.202 The EFSA plays a crucial role as it is designated by the

in  Luc  Bodiguel  and  Michael  Cardwell  (eds),  The  Regulation  of  Genetically  Modified  Organisms:  Comparative  Approaches  (OUP 2010), p101   

201  Governance  also  generally  implies  the  involvement  of  civil  society  beyond  ‘government’  although  the  focus  here  is 

particularly  on  the  legal  arrangement  of  EU  and  national  contributions  to  decisions.  Multi‐level  governance  should  also  encourage consideration of the role and influence of sub‐national regions and international bodies such as the World Trade  Organization (WTO). 

202  Article  7  and  Article  19  of  the  2003  Regulation  that  the  Commission  may,  take  into  account  ‘other  legitimate  factors 

1

legislation to cooperate with competent authorities of Member States to process the scientific risk assessment.

According to the examination procedure provided in EU Regulation No 182/2011203, the decision making on authorization of GMOs shall follow the form of implanting acts adopted by the Commission. Therefore, the authorization process is very much centralized to the European Union level while the Member State also plays a crucial role in the process. There are two stages the Member States involved in which could influence the decision making: the Member States could vote on the draft decisions provided by the Commission in the Standing Committee and in case the decision is unable to be reached at the Standing Committee level, the Member States could vote in the Appeal Committee. The decision can be made either based on the qualified majority in favour of or against to. The qualified majority in defined in the as “…votes representing at least 55 percent of the 28 Member States, and at least 65 percent of the EU population. Where there is no qualified majority in favour of or against the draft decision in the Appeal Committee, the result is “no opinion”.204

The rules governing this procedure205 provide that where “no opinion” is issued by the Appeal

Committee, “the Commission may adopt the draft implementing act.”206 This wording in

certain extent gives the Commission the discretion. While regarding to the decision making of GMOs cases, the Deliberate Release Directive, the Food and Feed Regulation together with the Traceability and Labelling Regulation reduced the “margin for manoeuvre” of the Commission significantly.207

The process for authorizing GMOs broke down at the end of the 1990s, in the face of

203  Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules 

and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing  powers. 

204  European  Commission,  Communication  From  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—Reviewing the decision‐making process on genetically  modified organisms (GMOs), COM(2015) 176 final, Brussels, 22.4.2015.  205  Regulation (EU) No 182/2011  206  Article 6(3) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.  207  European Commission Evaluation of the EU legislative framework in the field of GM food and feed (2010) DG SANCO  Evaluation Framework Contract Lot3 (Food Chain) 

1

widespread public rejection of GM food and agriculture, and there were no authorizations between 1998 and 2004. The EU institutions and Member States ceased to apply the old legislation, and instead negotiated a new regulatory framework, composed of two key pieces of legislation, the Deliberate Release Directive and the Food and Feed Regulation. Since the entry into force of the Food and Feed Regulation in 2003, the Member States have not obtained a qualified majority in favour of or against a draft decision made by Commission on authorizing GMOs, including GMOs for cultivation or for GM food and feed. The result has always been “no opinion”. This situation has consistently happened at all stages of the authorization procedure both in the Standing Committee and in the Appeal Committee, under the current rules, and in the Council in the past.208

The authorization process is complicated, varying according to the level of agreement or disagreement between the Member States, and according to the uses for which the GMO is to be authorized, in particular, according to whether the GMO (including a seed or other plant propagating material) is ultimately for food or feed use or not. The key steps are a risk assessment by the EFSA, on the basis of information submitted by the applicant, and a decision on authorization by the Commission and Member States through the examination procedure set out by the Regulation (EU) 182/2011.209