|
TWN Info Service on Free
Trade Agreements
13 March 2007
CAP Worries FTA Threatens GM Food Labelling
The Consumer’s Association of Penang is concerned that the proposed
free trade agreement between Malaysia
and the US
would threaten laws which call for mandatory labeling of foods containing
genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
According to its President S M Mohd Idris, pressure is being exerted,
including in the context of the Malaysia-US free trade agreement negotiations,
for Malaysia to remove
these mandatory labeling requirements.
“Such demands are unreasonable and if they are agreed to it would mean
that the health and environmental concerns of Malaysians will be pushed
aside for the benefit of foreign companies selling food containing GMOs,”
he said in a letter to the media.
CAP believes labelling of genetically modified foods is crucial as consumers
should have the right to know what food they are eating, particularly
for those who may have health, religious and ethical concerns.
Labelling would also push GMO exporting countries to segregate their
GM and non-GM crops, shifting the burden to exporter countries, rather
than to importing countries like Malaysia to detect and identify GMO
shipments.
Best wishes,
Third World Network
2-1, Jalan 31/70A
Desa Sri Hartamas
50480 Kuala Lumpur
Tel: +603-2300 2585
Fax: +603-2300 2595
email: twnkl@po.jaring.my
websites: www.twnside.org.sg and www.ftamalaysia.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter to the Editor
10 March 2007
Dear Sir,
Re: Labelling of Genetically Modified Foods
As a group representing consumer interests especially as regards food
safety, CAP has been raising concerns about the risks of genetically-modified
organisms (GMOs), particularly in agriculture and in foods.
We were therefore very encouraged by the government’s efforts to protect
health and the environment through two pieces of legislation: the Biosafety
Bill (prepared by the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment)
and an amendment to the Food Regulations 1985 (under the Ministry of
Health).
Both laws have been under consideration for the past several years now.
They make it mandatory that food products containing GMOs should be
labeled that they do contain GMOs. This is in line with legislation
in many other countries, designed to protect consumers and the environment.
However we are now extremely concerned and anxious that these two laws
are now threatened by proposals made in the negotiations for a free
trade agreement with the United
States.
The Biosafety Bill, which is under the purview of the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment has an enabling clause that provides for the
identification and labelling of GMOs and items containing GMOs. The
amendments to the food regulations come under the purview of the Ministry
of Health.
It is imperative that both these Ministries expedite efforts to give
effect to mandatory labelling of GMF.
There are several reasons why such mandatory labelling is important:
1) Labelling is important for consumer choice, so that consumers can
choose whether or not they want to eat GM food.
2) There may be unintended effects of GMOs, such as potential allergenic
effects. Labelling would let consumers know of the GMO content of the
food, and would serve to warn those who have legitimate health concerns.
For example, if a gene from a nut is used in a GMO, as many people have
potentially fatal nut allergies, they would need to know the content
of the food and labeling could meet this need.
3) Labelling would also serve to inform consumers about GMO content,
particularly those who may have religious, ethical or moral concerns.
For example, if a pig gene was used in the making of a GM food, Muslim
consumers could be informed by an appropriate label. Likewise, if there
are fish genes in GM tomatoes, vegetarians would need a label informing
them that a food has a non-vegetarian GM gene.
4) Labelling would also push GMO exporting countries to segregate their
GM and non-GM crops, shifting the burden to exporter countries, rather
than to importing countries like Malaysia to detect and identify GMO
shipments.
5) Mandatory labeling is required because companies are unlikely to
adhere to labeling regarding GMO content if the labeling is only a voluntary
measure,
More than forty countries around the world, including China, Japan,
Australia and most European nations, already require mandatory labelling
of GM foods. Under the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the joint WHO/FAO
body regulating international food standards, the Committee on Food
Labelling has been discussing a global standard for mandatory GM food
labelling. The draft standard on GM labelling has support from a majority
of the Committee, including Malaysia.
We understand that pressure is being exerted, including in the context
of the Malaysia-US free trade agreement negotiations, for Malaysia to remove these mandatory
labeling requirements.
Such demands are unreasonable and if they are agreed to it would mean
that the health and environmental concerns of Malaysians will be pushed
aside for the benefit of foreign companies selling food containing GMOs.
We urge the government, particularly the Ministries concerned, not to
bow to such pressure to change its biosafety and food-safety laws, and
to continue with its policy to require mandatory labelling of GM food.
Yours sincerely,
S.M.Mohamed Idris
President
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malay translation
Surat
kepada Pengarang 12hb. Mac 2007
Tuan,
Per: Pelabelan Makanan Ubah Suai Genetik
Sebagai sebuah kumpulan yang mewakili kepentingan pengguna terutama
yang membabitkan isu keselamatan makanan, CAP telah berulangkali menyuarakan
kebimbangan mengenai risiko organisma yang diubah suai genetiknya (GMOs),
khususnya dalam bidang pertanian dan makanan.
Oleh itu kami mengalu-alukan usaha kerajaan untuk melindungi kesihatan
awam dan alam sekitar menerusi dua undang-undang: Rang Undang-undang
Keselamatan Bio (yang disediakan oleh Kementerian Sumber Asli dan Alam
Sekitar) dan pindaan kepada Peraturan Makanan 1985 (di bawah Kementerian
Kesihatan).
Kedua-dua undang-undang tersebut telah dipertimbangkan sejak beberapa
tahun lalu. Sebarang produk makanan yang mengandungi GMOs perlu dilabel
sebagai mengandungi GMOs. Ini selaras dengan undang-undang di negara-negara
lain yang dibentuk untuk melindungi pengguna dan alam sekitar.
Tetapi kami begitu bimbang memandangkan kedua-dua undang-undang tersebut
kini diancam oleh cadangan yang dikemukakan melalui rundingan perjanjian
perdagangan bebas dengan Amerika Syarikat.
Rang Undang-undang Keselamatan Bio, yang berada di bawah skop Kementerian
Sumber Asli dan Alam Sekitar mempunyai satu klausa yang membabitkan
pengenalpastian dan pelabelan GMOs dan barangan yang mengandungi GMOs.
Pindaan kepada peraturan makanan itu berada di bawah bidang kuasa Kementerian
Kesihatan.
Adalah penting kedua-dua Kementerian menyegerakan usaha agar kewajipan
melabel makanan ubah suai genetik dikuatkuasakan.
Terdapat beberapa alasan kenapa pelabelan seumpamanya perlu diwajibkan.
1) Pelabelan adalah penting kerana pengguna berpeluang memilih sama
ada mereka ingin memakan makanan GM atau tidak.
2) Mungkin terdapat kesan-kesan GMOs yang tidak diketahui, seperti berpotensi
meninggalkan kesan alahan. Dengan melabel, para pengguna akan mengetahui
kandungan GMO dalam makanan, dan diharap dapat memberi amaran kepada
mereka yang menitikberatkan soal kesihatan. Misalnya, jika gen kacang
digunakan dalam GMO, sebahagian besar pengguna yang alah kepada kacang
sudah tentu ingin mengetahui kandungan makanan tersebut, dan pelabelan
sudah pasti memenuhi keperluan ini.
3) Pelabelan juga perlu memaklumkan kepada pengguna mengenai kandungan
GMO, terutama bagi mereka yang menitikberatkan soal agama, etika dan
moral. Misalnya jika gen babi digunakan dalam makanan GM, pengguna Islam
perlu dimaklumkan mengenainya melalui label yang sewajarnya. Begitu
juga jika gen ikan dimasukkan ke dalam tomato GM, golongan pemakan sayur
memerlukan label yang memaklumkan kepada mereka bahawa makanan tersebut
mengandungi gen GM bukan pemakan sayur.
4) Pelabelan akan mendesak negara-negara yang mengeksport GMO supaya
mengasingkan tanaman GM dan tanaman bukan GM mereka, dengan memindahkan
beban itu kepada negara-negara pengeksport, dan bukannya negara-negara
pengimport seperti Malaysia yang perlu mengesan dan mengenal pasti penghantaran
GMO.
5) Pelabelan perlu diwajibkan pelaksanaannya kerana syarikat yang terbabit
cenderung membelakangkan pelabelan kandungan GMO jika ia cuma perlu
dibuat secara sukarela.
6) Lebih daripada 40 buah negara di seluruh dunia termasuk China,
Jepun, Australia
dan kebanyakan negara-negara Eropah sudah pun mewajibkan pelabelan makanan
GMO. Di bawah Suruhanjaya Codex Alimentarius, iaitu pihak WHO dan FAO
yang menyelia piawaian makanan, jawatankuasa Pelabelan Makanan telah
membincangkan piawaian bagi pelabelan makanan GMO di seluruh dunia.
Piawaian draf bagi pelabelan GM mendapat sokongan daripada majoriti
ahli jawatankuasa berkenaan termasuk Malaysia.
Kami percaya tekanan telah dikenakan, termasuk dalam konteks rundingan
perjanjian perdagangan bebas Malaysia-Amerika, di mana Malaysia dikehendaki
mengubah keperluan melabel yang diwajibkan itu.
Tuntutan seumpamanya adalah tidak masuk akal dan jika mereka menyetujuinya,
ia bermakna kebajikan warga Malaysia dan alam
sekitarnya akan diketepikan demi kepentingan syarikat luar yang menjual
makanan yang mengandungi GMOs. Kami menggesa kerajaan agar khususnya
Kementerian-Kementerian yang terbabit agar tidak tunduk kepada desakan
supaya diubah undang-undang mengenai keselamatan bio dan keselamatan
makanan, tetapi sebaliknya meneruskan dasar yang mewajibkan pelabelan
makanan GM.
Yang benar,
S.M. Mohamed Idris
Presiden
BACK
TO MAIN | ONLINE
BOOKSTORE | HOW TO ORDER
|