The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
Gen. Pecos Kutesa (UPDF) warned that the Bill is a threat not only in Uganda, but the rest of Africa, because, he said, “one who creates seeds can create artificial seeds”. Thomas Tayebwa (Ruhindi North) said the Bill was sponsored by foreign agencies.
“The European Union whose market we are targeting is totally against the production of genetically modified products in favour of organic products. The GMO industry, which we are trying to invest in, is going down and Ugandans are going to lose out.” Tayebwa is reported to have said.
Muyambi said Uganda’s agricultural problem was political and not absence of a law to promote GMOs as the pro GMO lobby argued.
“The agricultural sector is underfunded and President Museveni says he putting the money on building roads. Even with the GMO law in place the agricultural sector will never be redeemed under this government which has failed to prioritise agriculture,” Muyambi says.
He says Museveni’s government sidelines technocrats and instead hands the agricultural sector to the army and cites Operation Wealth Creation (OWC), a project under President Museveni’s brother; Gen. Caleb Akandwanaho aka Salim Saleh, where billions of shillings have been invested to alleviate poverty through agriculture.
On the argument of scientists developing genetically modified drought resistant varieties like NARO’s Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project in Kasese, Muyambi asked why they do the field trials in Kasese where there is water for irrigation and not in Karamoja which is dry to prove the drought resistance of their maize.
Muyambi says the MPs “passed a law they don’t understand and don’t know the implications of.” He cited other examples; including the Plant Varieties Act and Geographical Indications Act.
“Can you imagine the Geographical Indications Act stipulates that if one, for instance develops a variety of irish potatoes to be grown in Kabale he or she can patent it and it wouldn’t be grown in any other part of the country without the owner of the patent being paid?” he said.
Muyambi also says apart from the Bill being unconstitutional the timing of the passing of the Bill was not proper as members of Parliament were heated up by the age limit debate.
But Dr. Barbara Zawedde, the co-ordinator of the Uganda Biosciences Information Centre (NARO information hub) reportedly said Uganda has capacity to regulate biotechnology.
“We can now also choose what we want to use in modern biotechnology in agriculture, medicine, environment management, and medicine,” she said.
Some Contentious Articles in GMO Bill
- Labeling and identification of GMO materials in the market and in use in Uganda is complicated because much as it is very easy for a supermarket to label mangoes or any fruits it’s selling, a woman selling a basket of mangoes on her head will most likely not put a label on the basket that they are a GMO product.
- The National Gene Bank in which all genetic material, indigenous, or otherwise required shall be kept and preserved should be an independent authority and not under NARO which promotes GMOs.
- CSOs and other stakeholders want declaration of GMO free areas so as to prevent pollution on indigenous varieties by GMOs.
- Lack of public participation and awareness of the Bill.
- Penalties and offences of GMOs rules are laughable and big multinational companies will breach and pay.
Dear Mr. Andrew Mujuni Mwenda, the CEO of The Independent Magazine Publications: your recent article “Tears and cheers over new GMO law” raises a lot of questions as far as I’m concerned. After reading it over and over again, I came to a conclusion that it was designed to paint a blemish on Uganda’s science of modern Modern Agricultural Biotechnology (MAB) with which specialists in NARO genetically-engineer/modify plants/crops for resistance against a lot of pests, diseases and challenges like drought.. Myself as a scientist and a keen reader of The Independent Magazine, I’d like to inform you that I equally follow keenly what NARO is doing to apply the science of MAB. But what disturbs me is that it looks like it is The Independent Magazine’s official policy to oppose and decampaign MAB/GM-technology. This is so, because just a few months after you published: “EXPOSED: Uganda’s secret GMO research” with the aim of dissuading Parliament not to approve the National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill (2012) into law—to the contrary, MPs passed the Bill on October 4th, 2017. Now, here comes another skewed one intended to mislead the public and the world at large, that the new National Biosafety Law was illegally passed. That it was “smuggled”, because a few days earlier there had been chaos, when MPs fought amongst themselves and were violently forced out of their chambers allegedly by SFC operatives. Now, Mr. Mwenda, did Parliament close down business because 25 MPs had been thrown out by the Speaker for misbehaving? Or did it close down because MPs were forcefully ejected out? Did the Independent’s interviewees want the whole country to close down because MPs had fought among themselves and were forcefully ejected? Did the Independent Magazine which carries these allegations, close down? Did public and private businesses like transport, education, hotels, other services and NGOs sympathetic to the MPs who were ejected, close down because fighting had taken place in Parliament? If these didn’t close down, why should any good thinking person expect Parliament to stop to a halt, because 25 and other of its members [the Opposition] were out? Does the 25 plus the Opposition amount to the majority required for Parliament to operate? Why did the Independent carry such lousy allegations? Is it desperate for any remarks as long as they’re strongly opposed to the new Biosafety law or to GMOs? I found it extremely laughable for your reporter [ANDREW S. KAGGWA] who carefully chooses well-known anti-biotech activists, to include allegations by the Jakana Fruit dealer to claim their exports to Europe have dwindled because Uganda had approved the Biosafety law!! Does passing of this law usher in GM-fruits? Uganda has not developed any GM fruits, save for the bananas resistant to the ferocious banana bacterial wilt (BBW) and those with improved levels of Vitamin A micronutrients. But these are not yet ready for release. This allegation by Jakana begs the question: Has Europe explained the reason why they have rejected Jakana’s fruits? (If the allegation is true at all!!) Does Europe itself pour into the sea, the millions of tons of GM-corn, soya and cotton it imports from North America (USA, Canada and Mexico), from Latin America (Brazil, Argentina) and more from India, China e.t.c? Or do they consume and feed their livestock and poultry? If they utilize them, including production of millions of metric tons of GMO-drugs and other medical products, why should Ugandan GM-products be “rejected”? These allegations are outbursts planned to come out, in the aftermath of the passage of the National Biosafety Bill into law. It is something they’ve worked hard and long to fail. Now that it went the ‘wrong’ way, that’s the reason for this sour-grapping! Let me make particular reference to the science of modern agricultural biotechnology, which is why the National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill (2012) was formulated. It mainly aims to regulate and oversee modern agricultural biotechnology in research, development, release and utilization (farming, handling, processing trading, and consumption e.t.c). Some many years ago, Mr. Godber Tumushabe, the CEO Great Lakes Institute for Strategic Studies (GLISS) was contracted by the Government of Uganda – while he headed ACODE – as a consultant to study and provide the basis for formulating a national biotechnology and biosafety framework for Uganda. Godber studied the then regulatory environment and found it lacking the adequate policies, laws, institutions and regulations to oversee and manage the science of modern biotechnology. He among others recommended the need for the formulation of a policy and consequently enact a law and relevant regulations. Today, ACODE is one of the leading anti-biotechnology and GM-technology NGOs, that connives with The Independent Magazine’s Anti-GMO Reporter to model stories the way they are published – skewed/inclined against this science. It’s either a deeply-seated fear, a cultic hatred or all these and ideological disorientation of the activists and Kaggwa plus his news sources that are using the Independent Magazine, most likely in full knowledge of the Editor, to consistently run such negative stories against biotechnology. Ofcourse, I don’t rule out covert participation of other NGOs and related activists within their networks, who influence the planting of such stories in the Magazine. Then there’s the private sector or business interests, that see loss of market for some of their products such as chemicals, that are used for spraying against pests, which biotechnology replaces in many aspects. When scientists employ biotechnology to genetically-engineer crops, to resist pests and diseases, in some cases spraying of chemicals against such pests and diseases, would not be necessary anymore. As a result, chemical manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers and retailers lose market for their chemical products. Such interested parties would also covertly buy NGO activists and journalists, to fight against GM-crop-technology, especially via sponsorship of journalists and media messages that cause public fear, apprehension and rejection. And that is indeed the intention of such articles by ANDREW KAGGWA—who himself has expressed his anti-Biotech/GM-technology side in his Facebook Page expressions/arguments. Please Mr. Mwenda don’t allow the esteemed publication to be used to fight advancement in agricultural research and development–atleast I know you as a progressive man who believes in, and supports civilization in all sectors, including agriculture. These groups possess conservative and retrogressive ideas, that want our farmers to remain poor smallholder peasants so that as activists they have reason to fundraise in Europe to “fight and reduce poverty, hunger, disease and malnutrition.”