semi GM: chi contamina viene risarcito

["AlessandroGimona"<agimona at libero.it>]

Cari tutti,

Come forse sapete, una recente sentenza in Canada ha decretato che un 
agricoltore sul cui terreno crescevano alcune piante GM brevettate 
Monsanto, deve risarcire la suddetta compagnia perche' le piante erano 
non autorizzate. 
Questo  non ostante che i semi siano giunti sul terreno di Schmeiser 
spontaneamente..e senza il suo consenso.

In sostanza non solo la compagnia non ha il dovere di contenere la 
contaminazione, ma addirittura puo' beneficiarne.
Dubito che la maggioranza degli agricoltori condivida questa sentenza.
Non e' escluso che una sorte simile possa toccare in futuro a qualche 
agricoltore italiano.
 
Riporto sotto un editoriale del RAFI a riguardo.

Saluti,
Alessandro Gimona



MONSANTO VS. PERCY SCHMEISER
April 6, 2001
Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI)
http://www.rafi.org.
On March 29, 2001, a Canadian judge dealt a crushing blow to Farmers' 
Rights
by ruling that Percy Schmeiser, a third generation Saskatchewan farmer, 
must
pay Monsanto thousands of dollars for violating the corporation's 
monopoly
patent on genetically engineered (GE) canola seed.
Under Canadian patent law, as in the U.S. and many other industrialized
countries, it is illegal for farmers to re-use patented seed, or to grow
Monsanto's GE seed without signing a licensing agreement. If the
biotechnology corporations and U.S. Trade Reps get their way, every 
nation
in the world will be forced to adopt patent laws that make seed saving
illegal. The ruling against Schmeiser establishes an even more dangerous
precedent because it means that farmers can be forced to pay royalties 
on GE
seeds found on their land, even if they didn't buy the seeds or benefit 
from
them.
Percy Schmeiser did not buy Monsanto's patented seed, nor did he obtain 
the
seed illegally. Pollen from genetically engineered canola seeds blew 
onto
his land from neighboring farms. (Percy Schmeiser's neighbors and an
estimated 40% of farmers in Western Canada grow GE canola). Monsanto's 
GE
canola genes invaded Schmeiser's farm without his consent. Shortly
thereafter, Monsanto's "gene police" invaded his farm and took seed 
samples
without his permission. Percy Schmeiser was a victim of genetic 
pollution
from GE crops--but the court says he must now pay Monsanto US$10,000 for
licensing fees and up to US$75,000 in profits from his 1998 crop.
The GE canola that drifted onto Schmeiser's farm was engineered to 
withstand
spraying of Monsanto's proprietary weedkiller, Roundup. But Schmeiser 
did
not use Roundup on his canola crop. After all, if Schmeiser had sprayed 
his
crop, the chemical would have killed the majority of his canola plants 
that
were not genetically engineered to tolerate the weedkiller! Schmeiser 
didn't
take advantage of Monsanto's GE technology, but the court ruling says 
he's
guilty of using the seed without a licensing agreement.
Monsanto (acquired by Pharmacia last year) is the world's largest
biotechnology corporation. The court ruling has far-reaching 
implications
for farming communities around the world. Last year, Monsanto's GE seed
technology was planted on 41.6 million hectares (103 million acres)
worldwide. That means Monsanto accounted for 94% of the global area 
sown to
genetically modified seeds in 2000. (Total worldwide area is 44.2 
million
hectares or 109.2 million acres.)
Thanks in large part to Terminator technology, the Monsanto's name has
became synonymous with GE seeds and corporate greed. Although Monsanto
disavowed "suicide seeds" in the wake of international public protest, 
the
company has routinely employed Draconian measures to prevent farmers 
from
re-using patented seed, including the use of private police to root out
seed-saving farmers, and toll-fee hotlines to encourage rural residents 
to
snitch on their farm neighbors. Monsanto has threatened to "vigorously
prosecute" hundreds of cases against seed saving farmers, but 
Schmeiser's
was the first major case to reach the courts. Schmeiser courageously 
decided
to fight back and speak out against bioserfdom.
In North America, where many farmers have embraced GE technology, there 
are
signs of resistance worth noting:
The National Farmers Union of Canada has called for a national 
moratorium on
producing, importing and distributing GE food.
A bill introduced in North Dakota (U.S.), backed by the state's wheat
farmers, would impose a moratorium on growing genetically modified 
wheat--a
crop that Monsanto hopes to commercialize by 2003.
In March 2001 the National Farmers Union (U.S.) adopted a policy 
supporting
a moratorium on the introduction, certification and commercialization of
genetically engineered wheat until issues of cross-pollination, 
liability,
commodity and seed stock segregation, and market acceptance are 
adequately
addressed.
The Indiana (U.S.) House of Representatives passed a bill last month
defending the farmers' right to save seed.
Oklahoma's Secretary of Agriculture, Dennis Howard, recently commented:
"After reviewing Monsanto's 2001 Technology Agreement, I would 
discourage
any farmer from signing this document. Not only does this contract 
severely
limit the options of the producer, it also limits Monsanto's 
liability...The
protection of the Monsanto contract is strictly one-sided and I would
encourage producers to carefully consider this before entering into this
agreement."
Support Percy Schmeiser
Percy Schmeiser has filed a counter-suit against Monsanto, but his 
family
faces enormous legal costs that cannot be sustained without outside
assistance. Contributions to Schmeiser's legal defense may be sent to:
"Fight Genetically Altered Food Fund Inc."
CIBC (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce)
603 Main St. Humboldt SK Canada SOK 2AO
Phone 306 682-2614
For more information about Percy Schmeiser's case, go to:
http://www.percyschmeiser.com.
To see the 62-page decision by Canada's federal court judge Andrew
MacKay go to: http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca
rafi at rafi.org; http://www.rafi.org.

Alessandro Gimona
agimona at libero.it