Studying the Approach of National Legal Systems in Dealing with Genetically Modified Crops with an Emphasis on Iran's Legal System
Akhlāq-i zīstī i.e., Bioethics Journal,
Vol. 12 No. 37 (1401),
20 June 2022
,
Page 1-17
https://doi.org/10.22037/bioeth.v12i37.38194
Abstract
Background and Aim: Many researches have been done regarding the regulations governing transgenic products in international documents, but the explanation of this issue has not been given much attention from the point of view of the domestic laws of countries. In this article, an attempt has been made to investigate the legal system governing genetically modified crops in the national laws of some countries, with an emphasis on the Iranian law.
Methods: This article has been done in a descriptive-analytical way using library resources.
Ethical Considerations: In this article, the ethical aspects of library study, including the authenticity of texts and trustworthiness in references, have been observed.
Results: In the law of countries such as Germany, Canada, America and Australia, codified rules have been established in the field of monitoring and controlling the production of genetically modified crops. Also, the study of Iran's laws and regulations regarding transgenic products shows that the main approach is to produce, import, export and consume transgenic products within the framework of national and international laws and regulations. However, Iran's Biosafety Law, as the most important law regarding these products, has flaws and shortcomings that have caused various interpretations and, as a result, the lack of proper implementation of the law.
Conclusion: All countries are facing many challenges in controlling and monitoring transgenic products. The major challenges ahead include things such as advanced laboratory control of shipments of transgenic agricultural and food industries, control of the health of products, especially grains, at the level of consumer markets, monitoring the possible adverse effects of transgenic products in the environment, evaluating transgenic plants produced by researchers in these countries and how to issue licenses in response to requests for the production of transgenic products and monitoring mechanisms for transgenic products. Based on this, more attention and international and national determination in establishing clear and enforceable laws that include prioritizing health and environment and then economic and agricultural growth, for the orderliness and coherence of the rules governing transgenic products are still felt.
Please cite this article as:
Emad Marvasti F, Pourghassab Amiri A, Behniafar AR, Hossein Jalali. Studying the Approach of National Legal Systems in Dealing with Genetically Modified Crops with an Emphasis on Iran's Legal System. Akhlaq-i zisti, i.e., Bioethics Journal. 2022; 12(37): e34.
- Transgenic Products; National Rights; Biosafety Law; Environment
How to Cite
References
Vazin Karimian M. Biotechnology development from viewpoint of 1404 document and general policien of system (legal approach). MLJ. 2010; 4(12) :13-24. [Persian]
James C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2009. ISAAA Brief No.41. Ithaca, New York: ISAAA; 2016.
Ghamami MM. Technology Rights: Rights against the genetic food crisis. Journal of Psychology and Educational Sciences. 2004; 11(46): 46-47. [Persian]
Sendashonga C, Hill R, Petrini A. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Interaction between the Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Organisation for Animal Health. Review Scientific technique. 2005; 24(1): 19-30.
Rezaei Nandeli M. The legal system governing transgenic crops (genetically modified) in the international and domestic legal system. Master's thesis in environmental law. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University; 2007. p.74-76. [Persian]
Gerdung A. Germany’s Liability Law for GMO Cultivation. Commissioned by the Sustainabilty Council of New Zealand. New Zealand: Wellington; 2006. p.87.
F.R.G. Fed. Ministry of Consumer Protection, Food Agric. Information on the Amendment to Germany’s Genetic Modification Act. 2020. p.67. Available at: http://www.agbioworld.org/word/German-1.doc.
Lütz S, Liese A. 30 Years of Safe Genetic Engineering in Germany. Angewandte. 2020; 59(33): 13668-13669.
Brookes G, Barfoot P. Pg Econ. Ltd., Co-Existence in North American Agriculture: Can GM Crops be Grown with Conventional and Organic Crops? Dorchester: PG Economics Limited; 2004.
J.Ovesna M, Chaouchi J, Hodel Y, Bertheau Y. Decision support systems (DSS) and GMO detection. Montpellier: 2nd International Conference on Co-Existence Between GM and non-GM Based Agricultural Supply Chain; 2020.
Wozniak CA, McHughen A. Regulation of agricultural biotechnology: The United States and Canada. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.
Muringai V, Fan X, Goddard E. Canadian consumer acceptance of gene-edited versus genetically modified potatoes: A choice experiment approach. Agricultural Economics Society. 2020; 68(1): 47-63.
Tladi D. Civil liability in the context of the Cartagena Protocol: To be or not to be (binding)? International Environmental Agreements. Politics Law and Economics. 2010; 10(1): 15-27.
Faunce TA. Australian National University Medical School, Australia. The UNESCO Bioethics Declaration 'Social Responsibility' Principle and Cost-Effectiveness Price Evaluations for Essential Medicines. Monash Bioethics Review. 2018; 24(3): 9-10.
Stokstad E. United States relaxes rules for biotech crops. In Science and Policy. Washington, DC: AAAS; 2020.
Kimani V, Gruera G. Implications of import regulations and information requirements under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety for GM commodities in Kenya. Agbioforum. 2017; 13(3): 222-241.
Marshal J. the Cartagena Protocol and Genetically Modified Mosquitoes. Nature Biotechnology Journal. 2019; 28(2): 896-897.
Coorea AC, Recarte IS. Law framework compilation on GMOs: Cartegena Protocol, Codex Alimentarius, Australia, US, European Union, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil. Bulletin de ro IV. 2010; 83(947): 61-67.
Salehi GH. Expert opinion regarding the draft of the National Biosafety Law of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Iran Islamic Council Research Center; 2008. p.34. [Persian]
Samavati Pirouz A. Analysis and Criticism of Iranian Biosafety Act (2009) with a Focus on Approaches of Criminal Law. MLJ. 2010; 4(12) :149-167. [Persian]
Salehi Jozani GH, Tohidfar M, Sadeghi A. Biological safety of transgenic products. Tehran: Publications of Iran Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute; 2010. [Persian]
Bigdeli S, Badiesanaye Esfahani A. The Civil Liability's Basis of Genetically Modified Foods (Transgenic) with Comparative Study in Iran's Law and International Instruments. Comparative Law Review. 2015; 5(2): 287-316. [Persian]
- Abstract Viewed: 309 times
- PDF (فارسی) Downloaded: 166 times