On the 14^th of May, Corporate European Observatory organised a side event on the 4^th Meeting of the Parties of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in Bonn, Germany to discuss further decisions regarding the Cartagena Protocol. The Side event carried the title ‘Who is liable for the socio-economic and environmental damage caused by GM monocultures in Latin America and Europe?’

The following speakers were invited presenting the following subjects:

• Lilian Joensen, Grupo de Refl exion Rural, Argentina: „17 Years GMO experience in Argentina: the impacts of RoundupReady soya and RoundupReady maize“
• Gilda Roa, Mov. Agrario y Popular (MAP), Paraguay: “Testimony of the consequences of RR soy expansion in Paraguay: rural conflicts, intoxications, and organised resistance”
• An Maeyens, ASEED Europe: “Socio-economic impacts of soy expansion in Paraguay – rural depopulation and human rights violations”
• Rosa Binimelis, Plataforma Transgènics Fora!, Catalunya, Spain: „Co-existence proven impossible“
• Amaranta Herrero, Plataforma Transgénicos Fora!, Catalunya, Spain: “Who is liable? Cases of GM Maize contamination in Catalunya”
• Johan Diels, GAIA (Grupo Acção e Intervenção Ambiental), Portugal: “Algarve GMO Free: resistance against GM crops in Portugal”

Johan Diels, member of GAIA and Plataforma Trangénicos Fora Portugal, spoke on campaigns and resistance against the cultivation of GMOs in Portugal. He talked about the campaigns for the creation of GM Free Zone and gave special attention to the action in Silves in the summer of 2007 and the strategy of criminalisation of the activists launched by the Portuguese government in the aftermath. His speech can be found below.

Good afternoon.

Allow me to account for a short story on GMO resistance in Portugal.

Let us start with a little bit of background. Since years, different environmental groups and organisations have been waging campaign against the cultivation and importation of GMOs. And they have a reason to do so as last year, Portugal was the 4^th largest GMO cultivating country in the EU.

Initially campaigns were rather low profile. However, through persistence, since 5 years an increasing number of regions and municipalities have declared themselves GMO free zones. With this statement they make a political statement saying that they do not wish any GMO cultivation on their local territories.

The southern region of the Algarves was the first region declared GMO free in 2003. This was done by the regional governing body in which all municipalities of the region are represented.

Now I should tell you that this declaration only shows an intention because there exists currently no legal framework or right for any government in the EU, apart from the European Commission itself to ban the import or cultivation of GMOs.

This has lead to a large democratic deficit within the EU. On one hand, 70% of all EU citizens do not want GMOs on their plates or in their backyards. On the other hand has the European Commission mainly been pushing forward a pro-GMO agenda. One cannot conclude from those facts that the EU has been defending the interest of the citizens it is supposed to represent. Probably the EU has more been adding to the accomplishment of GMO industry agendas and bowing for the pressure of the World Trade Organisation.

Now let us go back to Portugal. Last year one farmer decided it was time to introduce GMOs in the Algarve region. For 4 years, the region had been declared GMO Free. And in this case, we can take that literally as no single farmer had moved from conventional crop farming towards GM cultivation before.

Both local and national organisations reacted, however there was little they could do. Then on the 17^th of august, seemingly out of nowhere appeared a group of 150 activist, destroying 1ha of the 51 hectare field. They used their feet to trample the corn, carried out the action broad daylight, had invited the media beforehand and had a public press speaker. In a press release issued together with the action, the movement offered the farmer enough organic corn seeds to cultivate his land the next year.

That evening, that action was on all Portuguese television journals. Such a form of direct action had been unseen in Portugal. The repercussion in Portuguese society was accordingly unseen. Since the activists had informed media beforehand about the action, there were video images available, which certainly contributed to the attention the issue received. Also the morning after, most newspapers had the action on their front pages.

In those initial media reports, focus went mainly towards the criminal aspect and spectacular nature of the action. However gradually, news stories shifted their attention more towards the GMO issue as well, resulting in articles in magazines and papers on explaining the debate on GMOs, longer television reports and debates in news programmes and talk shows.

Now, how did the Portuguese government react on these events? It was in fact not very difficult to see through their strategy.

First enters the minister of agriculture in the story. His message was primarily consequently and very simply repeating that the cultivated GMO is safe and that Portugal is in line with European law. In addition he would express his support towards the farmer who suffered from this so called violent attack. He visited the field with a small army of journalists, tapping the farmer on his back in front of the cameras.

Secondly enters the Minister of Internal Affairs. He would stress out that the activists will be investigated and brought to trial. Then appeared the information in the media that the minister personally had attended the coordination meeting between judicial police and state security services regarding the case. He was then the first government actor, labelling the action, and I am quoting, as ‘ecoterrorismo soft’.

To give you a bit a feeling of this criminalisation, let us have a “quotes of the week” moment. I will not read out, the quotes on the slides speak for themselves.

Months later, it has been become clear how serious the statements of the minister and the police should be taken. In a report of Europol called the ‘EU Terrorism Situation and Trends Report’, this particular action was mentioned and therefore classified by at least the Portuguese police as an act of terrorism.

Before finishing let me just quickly highlight the contrast that exists in this story:

On one hand we have one group of 150 activist destroys one hectare of a 51 hectare GMO field using their feet to trample the corn, carrying out the action in broad daylight and with a public press speaker. In total the farmer own 70 hectares of cultivated land, which implies that the relative loss of profit for the farmer was minimal.

On the other hand, government launches a strategy of criminalisation, which ends up with the action been mentioned as an act of terrorism in a Europol report.

The cycle is complete. We end up again at the level of the European Union.

The current situation is that 4 people have been identified and have been interrogated several times in relation to the case. A court case is likely to start in a few months. Their it will be decided whether these people were involved in the action. If so, the question remains as well whether they will stand trial as terrorists, mere criminals or as defenders of public interest.

Thank you