WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/INF/9 
12 October 2004 
 
 (04-4264) 
Committee on Trade and Environment Original:   English 
  
STATEMENT BY THE SECRETARIAT OF THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL 
DIVERSITY (CBD) AT THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT  
SPECIAL SESSION OF 12 – 13 OCTOBER 2004 
 
Paragraph 31 (i)
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 11 October 2004, is being circulated at the request of 
the CBD Secretariat . 
 
_______________ 
 
 Mr. Chairman, 
Distinguished delegates,  
1. I wish to thank you for the invitation to attend this meeting on behalf of the CBD Secretariat, 
and for your continuing interest in the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Cartegena Protocol 
on Biosafety. 
2. At the April meeting of this Committee, I brie fed you on the decisions of the seventh meeting 
of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD as we ll as of the first meeting of the Parties to the 
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (COP-MOP 1) that are of relevance to the work of the 
Special Session of the CTE. 
3. As requested at the last meeting of this Committe e, on 22 June 2004, I wo uld like to take this 
opportunity to provide additional information on some  recent developments under the Protocol that 
are relevant to your work. 
4. As you know, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafet y entered into force in September 2003.  As 
of 5 October 2004, there were 108 Parties to the Prot ocol.  The first meeting of the Parties to the 
Protocol (COP-MOP 1) took place on 23 to 27 Febr uary 2004, in Kuala Lumpur.  The second and 
third meetings of COP-MOP will take place on an  annual basis, with a decision on subsequent 
periodicity of meetings to be taken at a later stag e.  The second meeting of COP-MOP will take place 
in June 2005, in Montreal, Canada, and the third me eting will take place in May 2006, in Brazil, in 
conjunction with COP-8.  Decisions of COP-MOP are taken by consensus. 
5. The Protocol aims to ensure an adequate level of protection in the field of the safe transfer, 
handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs).  In general, the Protocol applies to all LMOs 
that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.  
However, certain types of LMOs are excluded e ither from the entire Protocol or from specific 
provisions.  There are different categories of LMOs re ferred to in the Protocol, which are subject to 
different requirements.  Let me address some of these requirements in more detail and update you on 
the pertinent decisions taken by COP-MOP 1, as we ll as on some recent figures on decisions taken by 
Parties with regard to the procedural requirements. TN/TE/INF/9 
Page 2  
 
 Identification requirements 
6. The Protocol requires each Party to take measu res to identify LMOs subject to transboundary 
movement in accompanying documentation.  For the purpose of identification requirements the 
Protocol distinguishes three different categories of LMOs on the basis of their intended use:  
(i) LMOs for direct use as food or feed or for processing (LMOs-FFP);  (ii) LMOs destined for contained use;  and (iii) LMOs for inten tional introduction into the environment. 
7. In the case of the last two categories of LMOs, the Protocol requires clear identification of the 
organisms as LMOs in accompanying documentati on.  In the case of LMOs for intentional 
introduction into the environment, additional inform ation specifying the identity and relevant traits 
and characteristics of the LMOs is also required.   
8. With regard to LMOs-FFP, the Protocol re quires that documentation accompanying such 
LMOs clearly identifies that they “may contai n” LMOs and are not intended for intentional 
introduction, as well as a contact point for further information.  The documentation requirements for 
LMO-FFP were not fully resolved during the negotiati ons of the Protocol, which is why the Protocol 
also envisaged the need for taking a decision on  the detailed requirements for identification of 
LMOs-FFP by COP-MOP no later than two years after the entry into force of the Protocol.  With a 
view to fulfilling this call by the Protocol, COP- MOP 1 established an Open-ended Technical Expert 
Group, which would examine the issues relevant to  identification of LMOs-FFP, including unique 
identification, and to come up with a proposed dr aft decision on these detailed requirements for the 
consideration of COP-MOP at its second meeting.  The expert group is scheduled to meet in March 2005, in Montreal, Canada. 
9. In the same decision, COP-MOP 1 also requ ested the Executive Secretary to convene a 
workshop on capacity building and exchange of  experiences as related to the identification 
requirements, to be convened prior to the meeting of  the expert group in order to facilitate its work.  
The workshop will convene 1–3 Nove mber 2004, in Bonn, Germany. 
Procedural requirements 
10. Unlike the Conventions that were discussed at the June meeting of this Committee,
1 the 
Biosafety Protocol does not use the listing or de- listing of items (that is, in the case of these 
Conventions, substances or species) in annexes as a mechanism to assign trade restrictions or 
regulations to these items.  Instead, it sets out speci fic procedural requirements in accordance with the 
different categories of LMOs, while allowing, under certain conditions, for the exemption of 
individual LMO from these requirements. 
11. As you may know, in the case of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment , the 
Protocol sets out an advance informed agreement procedure (AIA) prior to the first intentional 
transboundary movement of such LMOs, under which the Party of import is notified of the proposed 
transboundary movement and given the opportunity to decide whether or not the import shall be 
approved and under what conditions (Articles 7 to 10 and 12).  Decisions of the Party of import shall 
be in accordance with risk assessments carried out  in a scientifically sound way and taking into 
account recognized risk assessment techniques. 
12. COP-MOP 2 will further operationalize these requirements by considering options for 
implementing the Protocol with respect to requirement s, by a Party of export, to ensure notification 
and the accuracy of information contained in the no tification by the exporter, and by considering the 
                                                      
1 CITES, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), and the 
Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consen t Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and 
Pesticides in International Trade (PIC).  TN/TE/INF/9 
 Page 3 
 
 
 development of guidance and a framework for a common approach in risk assessment and risk 
management. 
13. Provided adequate safety measures are in place, there is also a possibility for a Party of import 
to apply a simplified procedure.  In that regard, Parties of import may specify in advance, by notification to the Biosafety Clearing House, (a) cases in which intentional transboundary movement 
may take place at the same time as the movement is notified to the Party of import;  and (b) imports of 
LMO to be exempted from the advan ce informed agreement procedure. 
14. As of 5 October 2004, no Party had reported a decision taken under the advance informed 
agreement procedure to the Biosafety Clearing H ouse, and two Parties had notified the Biosafety 
Clearing House that they would exempt a total of  nine LMOs from the advance informed agreement 
procedure. 
15. Furthermore, COP-MOP may also decide that some LMOs are not likely to have adverse 
effects, in which case the advance informed agreement procedure shall not be applicable (paragraph 4 
of Article 7).  No such decision was taken so far. 
16. For LMOs for direct use as food, feed, or for processing (LMO-FFP) , the Protocol sets out 
another procedure, which essentially consists in a multilateral information exchange mechanism on 
final decisions by Parties regarding domestic use,  including placing on the market, of LMO-FFP.  As 
of 5 October 2004, the Biosafety Clearing House registered, under this procedure, a total of 340 LMO-FFP. 
17. As required by the Protocol in the provisions  on the advance informed agreement procedure 
(see paragraph 7 of Article), COP-MOP 1 adop ted procedures and mechanisms to facilitate 
decision-making by Parties of import under the adva nce informed agreement procedure, under which 
priority will be given to capacity building of developing country Parties. 
18. With regard to capacity building, the meeting of  the Parties to the Protocol adopted an action 
plan for building capacities for the effective impl ementation of the Protocol.  The meeting also 
established a coordination mechanism for the implementation of the action plan, including inter alia  a 
liaison group as well as coordination meetings and work shops.  The first meeting of the liaison group 
will take place in January 2005, in Montreal, Cana da, back-to-back with a coordination meeting for 
governments, organizations and donors implementing or funding bio safety-related capacity-building 
activities. 
19. We will be pleased to update you on further de velopments under the Biosafety Protocol in 
due course. 
Thank you for your attention. 
__________