Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 173kWORD 18k
17 October 2018
Question for written answer E-005313-18
to the Commission
Rule 130
Thomas Waitz (Verts/ALE) , Maria Heubuch (Verts/ALE) , Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) , Marco Affronte (Verts/ALE) , Martin Häusling (Verts/ALE) , Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE) , José Bové (Verts/ALE)

 Subject:  Imports of products obtained through non-exempt mutagenesis-related techniques
 Answer in writing 

The Judgment of the European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 25 July 2018 in the case Confédération paysanne and Others v French Premier ministre and Ministre de l’agriculture, de l’agroalimentaire et de la forêt, states that all mutagenesis-related techniques are to be considered as GMOs under EC law, and that only techniques with a long history of safe use are exempt.

The company Cibus began to market its first crop obtained through Oligonucleotides Directed Mutagenesis, SU Canola™, in North America in 2015. The Commission has not, to our knowledge, made any official statement regarding the process concerning any future imports of products coming from plants obtained through one of these techniques.

What steps has the Commission taken to ensure that health, environment and customs services have the necessary tools to be able to identify such products, as well as any contamination of non-genetically modified canola?

Last updated: 30 October 2018Legal notice