pic:manataka.orgFinally, the anticipated judgement in the Biowatch appeal against the order to pay Monsanto’s legal costs will be delivered this morning at 10am at the Pretoria High Court.

The outcome of this case has enormous consequences for the influence of genetically modified food in this country, and will set the standard for other environmental groups across the country that battle against monolithic giants like Monsanto in the future – will they be able to do so without fear of bankrupting themselves first?

We first reported on the appeal on 23 April 2007 – [high stakes on biowatch appeal] and [we’re still holding thumbs for biowatch] when we were rather mystified at the order by Judge Dunn for Biowatch to pay Monsanto South Africa’s legal costs, based on the premise that Monsanto was forced to come to court to protect its interests...

Biowatch originally served papers on the department of agriculture in August 2002, after failing to get a response to a number of requests about how decisions to allow GM crops in the country are made.

Monsanto SA applied (voluntarily), about a year later, to join the court proceedings as co-respondents on the grounds that they have a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the proceedings.

But I get ahead of myself. Here is the background to the case as issued in a press release by Biowatch yesterday:

1997 - the first genetically modified (GM) crops are commercially released in South Africa.

Dec 1999 the Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Act comes into operation.

July 2000 Biowatch South Africa makes its first request for information about how permitting decisions for GM crops are made. The organisation makes further requests on another three occasions up to February 2001 but receives inadequate responses from the Registrar. The information requested included:

• access to a selection of risk assessments
• information on legislation governing field trial licences before the implementation of the GMO Act
• an update on what permits had been granted
• permission to inspect permits granted
• permission to inspect records regarding compliance with public participation provisions of the GMO Act
• details about pending applications for permits for GM crops, exact coordinates of field trials and crops approved for commercial release

Aug 2002 Biowatch South Africa serves court papers on the Department of Agriculture, naming the Registrar for Genetic Resources, the Executive Council for Genetic Resources and the Minister of Agriculture as respondents.

Feb 2003 Monsanto South Africa (Pty) Ltd applies to join the court proceedings as a co-respondent, on the grounds that they have a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the proceedings. Two other companies – Stoneville Pedigreed and Delta and Pine Land - which distribute Monsanto GM seed also apply to join the proceedings as co-respondents, opposing Biowatch South Africa’s application. The Open Democracy Advice Centre joins proceedings as a friend of the court to advance arguments in support of Biowatch South Africa’s constitutional right of access to information.

May 2004 the case for access to information is heard in the Pretoria High Court.

24 Feb 2005 Acting Judge Eric Dunn hands down his order. Biowatch wins the right to the information, but are ordered to pay Monsanto's costs.

23 June 2005 Biowatch is granted leave to appeal the costs order.

13 Oct 2006 Biowatch is informed that April 23 2007 is the date on which a full bench of the Pretoria High Court will hear the appeal.

23 April 2007 the appeal case is heard by a full bench of the Pretoria High Court.

Other interesting reads on urban sprout:

Monsanto sham science exposed

educate yourself on genetically modified foods