By Trevor Wells
Farmers Legal Action Group-South Africa
27 July 2007
According to online news Stltoday.com bribery and corruption allegations involving Turkish officials and Monsanto were settled today with a US$300,000 payment.
Furthermore the US Government will once again monitor Monsanto's dealings. The Government ordered monitoring of Monsanto's external dealings after a previous conviction for bribery in 2005.
This follows closely in the wake of the announcement by the industry front Biotechnology Industry Organisation (BIO), on Wednesday,of their latest clean up
plans to introduce third-party auditing "to help agricultural players around the world feel confident that biotech crops are subject to stringent safety standards."
According to Carey Gillam, REUTERS, Kansas City, Missouri, agro-chemical giants Monsanto and DuPont endorsed this plan.
Forbes Insider Trading reported on 17 July that Monsanto's top executives had begun selling off their Monsanto shares. This was followed on 24 July 2007 by an announcement that 4 key
Monsanto patents asserted against farmers were rejected by the Patent Office.The new PR policy is in reality directly aimed at assuring ordinary shareholders that "We will walk out of this as clean as a whistle."
Monsanto has consistently shown disrespect for biosafety rules and a persistent reluctance to reveal information on the safety aspects of its products.It has a record of systematically bribing government officials to ignore safety regulations
In 2005, Monsanto bribed Indonesian officials to disregard safety regulations and was caught smuggling South African grown GM Bollgard cotton seed into Indonesia. The GM seed was disguised in crates labled "Rice". Monsanto was fined US$1 million for a US$50,000 bribe to a top Indonesian official after the CEO of Monsanto ordered it to be disguised as a "consultancy fee". At the time South Africa was a signatory to the
Cartagena Protocol which requires exports of GM seed to be properly labled. Heading this operation was Monsanto's Asia and Pacific CEO, Hugh Grant. At the same time was member of a British Government sponsored advisory committee. The International Advisory Board, was set up by Scottish Enterprise to advise businesses on how to expand overseas.
In the same year, 2005, Monsanto joined the South African Department of Agriculture in opposing a High Court application by Biowatch for information on safety aspects of GM crops. Monsanto claimed that they were protecting "
confidential business information". The Court ruled that access to this information was in the public interest and was a necessary part of the proper administration of the GMO Act.
In Europe Monsanto, supported by European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), kept the study from public scrutiny once again under a false claim of
confidential business information until a German Court Order forced Monsanto to release the full report.
The EFSA has more recently been criticised by the medical and veterinary professions for downplaying the role of Monsanto's patented anti-biotic resistant marker gene npt11. This antibiotic is water soluble and is therefore used extensively in aquaculture,quail, pigeon, rabbit, chick, piglet and calve rearing industries. Monsanto have been using this gene in a number of products including the highly controversial GM potato. Anti-biotic marker genes were supposed to be phased out in terms of European Union Directive 2001/18EC and Revising Directive 90/220/CEE.
The controversy about the GM Potato started in Egypt when researchers (Toxins Volume 6, Issue 6, 1998. Pages: 219-233) found that GM potatoes caused cancerous damage to part of the small intestine in rats.
More recently Monsanto was ordered to remove false claims on the
safety testing of GM foods in South Africa. In this cvase Monsanto claimed to conduct it's business according to a strict Code of Ethics. It can be deduced from their actions that they conduct their business according to the philosophy that
Crime Pays.
Bribes, corruption and relatively insignificant fines are small change for Monsanto compared to the huge prize of monopoly position in countries with large agricultural sectors. And once GM crops are planted in a country, any contamination of non-GM crops means Monsanto can also claim royalties from these farmers.