Dear Nina, dear Fulya,
thanks for your feedback on this issue and the additional info!
Best,
Johanna
Mag. Johanna ECKHARDT
Project Coordination
Tel. +43 680 21 26 343
mailto:johanna.eckhardt@no-patents-on-seeds.org johanna.eckhardt@no-patents-on-seeds.org
NO PATENTS ON SEEDS!
http://www.no-patents-on-seeds.org/ www.no-patents-on-seeds.org
http://www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds
http://www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed
From: Npos_2018 [mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de] On Behalf Of Nina Holland Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 11:26 AM To: npos_2018@testbiotech.de Subject: Re: [Npos_2018] Article about mutagenesis
Hi,
It is the same old Gil Riviere Wekstein who's more of a consultant (and fanatic):
https://www.agriculture-environnement.fr/qui-sommes-nous
He regularly attacks Stephane Foucart, who describes Wekstein's activities in detail here: https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2013/01/17/accusations-de-liens-entre...
This newsletter seems just his platform for his own writings, but from there, others with a bigger platform can pick it up. So him focusing on this 'divide' is annoying. He also wrote a long article about the work of the coalition working on new gmos. In any case he follows things we do very closely.
Best, Nina
========
L'un d'eux, le chimiste Jean-Marc Bonmatin (CNRS), a même poursuivi pour diffamation le responsable et rédacteur du site, Gil Rivière-Wekstein, et a obtenu gain de cause. Le travail de certains journalistes, en particulier Marie-Monique Robin, auteure du film documentaire Le Monde selon Monsanto, ou encore de Fabrice Nicolino, coauteur de Pesticides, révélations sur un scandale français, est aussi régulièrement attaqué.
M. Rivière-Wekstein présente son site Web comme la partie émergée d'Agriculture & Environnement, une lettre mensuelle de huit pages "indépendante des syndicats et des associations professionnelles". Sur son site, il revendique un tirage de 8 000 exemplaires. Interrogé par Le Monde, il dit tirer "à 6 500 exemplaires, pour 4 000 abonnés". Selon M. Rivière-Wekstein, le coût d'abonnement varie entre 75 euros et 150 euros par an, avec "des abonnements groupés dont le tarif est inférieur à 75 euros". En 2010, un chiffre d'affaires de quelque 180 000 euros a été déclaré par Amos Prospective, qui édite le site et la revue.
SOCIÉTÉ DE CONSULTING
Cette société employant deux salariés – dont M. Rivière-Wekstein – n'est pas une entreprise de presse, mais une société de consulting, dont l'objet est ainsi défini par ses statuts : "Conseils et études en matière politique, économique, financière, stratégique, agricole, environnement (...), publication de revues mensuelles et de livres et de toutes opérations pouvant se rattacher (...) à l'un des objets visés ci-dessus." Pourquoi ne pas avoir cherché à bénéficier du statut d'entreprise de presse ? "J'ai fondé la société avec ces statuts en pensant faire du consulting et j'ai changé en cours de route pour éditer Agriculture et Environnement, dit M. Rivière-Wekstein. Je n'ai pas fait changer les statuts pour des questions de simplicité."
N.
Op 7/02/22 om 11:14 schreef Fulya BATUR:
Hi all,
Thanks Johanna for the find, the article is indeed quite strange, and mixes up a lot of issues.
It is written by a journalist who claims to be independent, but is clearly against organic agriculture, and writes essentially for the agricultural industry.
The underlying goal of the article is to try to undermine the CJUE ruling and the work done by French organisations... He is using the NPOS petition (and an Ifoam event held in February 2021) to show that there are disagreements within the movement against new genetic engineering. But his argumentation is flawed... He does not even refer to the criteria of patentability that are the core of the NPOS petition and demands, but simply infers that the qualification of random mutagenesis as a GMO by the Court would open the door to their patentability. You know very well that the criteria for patentability are different, and not linked to the GMO Directive per se....
To my knowledge, there has been no communication from NPOS on the CJUE ruling, and there should not be either, we are talking about two different bodies of law. In my opinion, the core of the problem here might come from the assumptions made by this journalist (and also others) on the definition of ‘conventional breeding’.
Don’t know whether it is useful to react, because his reach does not seem to be that large, but important to know and keep in mind, as some reaction might follow from other stakeholders...
Best
Fulya
Fulya BATUR, PhD
Consultancy, Training, Research & Legal Advice
www.kybele-consult.com http://www.kybele-consult.com/
0032.484.77.86.18
From: Npos_2018 mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de On Behalf Of Johanna Eckhardt Sent: Monday, 7 February 2022 10:48 To: npos_2018@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de Subject: [Npos_2018] Article about mutagenesis
Dear all,
here is an interesting article (in French) about the mutagenesis discussion between NPOS, organic farmers and Confédération Paysanne/Guy Kastler.
https://www.agriculture-environnement.fr/2022/02/04/le-camp-des-anti-ogm-div...
Most important points (summary, not my comments):
1. the ruling of the ECJ in 2018 regarding mutagenesis as GMO 2. problem for organic farmers, because they use many varieties with (random) mutagenesis that are now regarded as (unregulated) GMO 3. NPOS was as well upset by the ECJ ruling 4. NPOS started a petition in Nov. asking as well to stop patents on random mutagenesis 5. NPOS fears that with the ECJ ruling random mutagenesis will not be regarded as conventional breeding anymore and thus can be patented. A collateral damage that Guy Kastler had obviously not anticipated. 6. NPOS says that the lines between GMO and conv. breeding are blurred by companies. 7. In fact it is rather Guy Kastler and the other French militant anti-GMO who, with their battle against mutagenesis, have blurred the lines, creating an absurd situation for organic farmers and opening the possibility of an extension of patents.
I am not sure, if we ever officially commented on the ECJ ruling, so the article may not 100% accurately reflect the position of NPOS.
Best,
Johanna
Mag. Johanna ECKHARDT
Project Coordination
Tel. +43 680 21 26 343
johanna.eckhardt@no-patents-on-seeds.org mailto:johanna.eckhardt@no-patents-on-seeds.org
NO PATENTS ON SEEDS!
http://www.no-patents-on-seeds.org/ www.no-patents-on-seeds.org
http://www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds www.facebook.com/nopatentsonseeds
http://www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed www.twitter.com/nopatentsonseed
_______________________________________________ Npos_2018 mailing list Npos_2018@testbiotech.de mailto:Npos_2018@testbiotech.de https://lists.testbiotech.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/npos_2018
