(→References) |
|||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
<p style="font-size:11pt">The EU legal framework on GMOs provides that no GMO or genetically modified food and feed can be placed on the market before it has been granted an authorization in accordance with that legal framework. To this end, a scientific assessment is performed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), in cooperation with the scientific bodies of the Member States. Where the results of the risk assessment show that the product does not pose a risk to health or to the environment under the proposed conditions of placing on the market/use, the Commission submits to the Member States, represented in the Standing Committee, a draft implementing decision of authorization, in accordance with the procedure set out in Regulation (EC) No 182/2011 (comitology procedure). Under this procedure, Member States vote under the “qualified majority” defined in the Treaty. In the Standing Committee, if Member States vote “Yes”, the Commission adopts the draft decision. If they vote “No”, or if the result of the vote is “No opinion” (no qualified majority either in favour or against is expressed), the Commission may submit the draft decision to another body representing the Member States at a higher level: the Appeal Committee. In the Appeal Committee, the Member States vote a second time on the draft decision tabled by the Commission. If the Member States vote “Yes”, the Commission adopts the draft decision. If they vote “No”, the Commission cannot adopt the draft decision. If the result of the vote is “No opinion”, the Commission is required by the GMO legal framework and by the Charter of Fundamental Rights to adopt a decision on the application so, in practice, has little choice but to give the authorization (European Commission, 2015).</p> | <p style="font-size:11pt">The EU legal framework on GMOs provides that no GMO or genetically modified food and feed can be placed on the market before it has been granted an authorization in accordance with that legal framework. To this end, a scientific assessment is performed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), in cooperation with the scientific bodies of the Member States. Where the results of the risk assessment show that the product does not pose a risk to health or to the environment under the proposed conditions of placing on the market/use, the Commission submits to the Member States, represented in the Standing Committee, a draft implementing decision of authorization, in accordance with the procedure set out in Regulation (EC) No 182/2011 (comitology procedure). Under this procedure, Member States vote under the “qualified majority” defined in the Treaty. In the Standing Committee, if Member States vote “Yes”, the Commission adopts the draft decision. If they vote “No”, or if the result of the vote is “No opinion” (no qualified majority either in favour or against is expressed), the Commission may submit the draft decision to another body representing the Member States at a higher level: the Appeal Committee. In the Appeal Committee, the Member States vote a second time on the draft decision tabled by the Commission. If the Member States vote “Yes”, the Commission adopts the draft decision. If they vote “No”, the Commission cannot adopt the draft decision. If the result of the vote is “No opinion”, the Commission is required by the GMO legal framework and by the Charter of Fundamental Rights to adopt a decision on the application so, in practice, has little choice but to give the authorization (European Commission, 2015).</p> | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | =Should organisms edited by CRISPR/Cas9 be considered as GMOs?= | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p style="font-size:11pt">Genome editing with CRISPR/Cas9 represents a specific and efficient tool to generate useful novel phenotypes with an economic interest by base additions, deletions, gene replacement or transgene insertion. These techniques generate phenotypic variation that is indistinguishable from that obtained through natural means or conventional mutagenesis. The fast development of this new technique leads to several issues concerning the regulatory status of organismes edited by engineered nucleases regarding to GMO legislation in the European Union. The European Commission has been trying to answer this issue since 2007 without managing to decide on account of the scientific, ethic, economic and societal questions raised by this issue, when it has to present it conclusion by march 2016. It appears that organisms edited by engineered nuclease should only fit to the current GMO legislation in the case of transgene insertion, even if the best regulatory issue may be a product base approach.</p> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
=References= | =References= |
Revision as of 16:41, 4 October 2016