Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
Third Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO.

INTRODUCED BY ANAKPAWIS PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVE
RAFAEL V. MARIANO

There is a wider range of agricultural knowledge, practice and technologies
being introduced nowadays. Of these, perhaps the most popular were the products
of biotechnology known as genetically modified crops or transgenic crops.
Biotechnology, is defined by Convention on Biological Diversity as “any
technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms. or
derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for a specific use.”
Moreover, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety used the term modern biotechnology
and commonly understood as “the manipulation of genetic material and fusion of
cells beyond normal breeding barriers,” with the most common example is genetic
engineering.

Genetic engineering involves the insertion and deletion of genes through
transgenic technologies to create genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The
application of modern biotechnology to food production has resulted to debates and
various related issues. Several studies have been released raising the potential
effect on human health and environment through yenctic modification

Based on the report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Science
and Technology for Development (IAASTD), a radical transformation of the world’s
food and farming systems - espccially on policies is necessary if we are to overcome
converging economic and environmental crises and feed the world sustainably.
‘Techniques such as genetic engineering are no solution for soaring food prices,
hunger and poverty. instead, locally, socially and environmentally responsible
methods are the solution. Community experiences in food production within small
and household based farming approaches using sustainable, culturally imbued
with time-tested indigenous farming practices produced more safe and nutritious
food. In areas where these are adopted, farmers experienced reduction in cost and
met some of their household food requirements. In essence, GMOs will not play a
substantial role in addressing poor farmer’s nceds and attaining food security. The
asscesment suggests that government and policy makers should shift their focus
on more sustainable means of producing food and also on the role of small and
resource poor farmers as stewards of biodiversity.

Republic Act No. 10068 or the Organic Agriculture Act of 2010 was passed
into law to promote, propagate, further develop and implement the practice of
organic agriculture in the Philippines. Moreover, section 3(b) of R.A. 10068 defines


organic agriculture as that ‘inchides all agricultural systems that promote the
ecologically sound, socially acceptable, economically viable and technically feasible
production of food and fibers.” While it also includes the usc of biotechnology and
other agricultural practices, it is implicitly stated that “shall not include genetically
modified organisms.” The production and importation of genetically modified crops
and by-products puts organic production and the country’s genetic resources at
great risk.

Furthermore, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, in which the Philippines
ie one of the signatories, makes clear that products from new technologies must be
tyased on the precautionary principle and allow developing nations to balance
public health against economic benefits. Governments can invoke the
precautionary principle until such time that the public sector are assured of the
safety of the product. For example, a country may ban imports of a living modified
organism if there is not enough scientific evidence that the product is safe and
require exporters to label shipments containing genetically altered commodities.

There are provincial and municipal governments in the Philippines which
have taken the initiative of establishing GMO-free zones because of the growing
worldwide concerns about environmental and health impact of GMOs. They are as
follows:

a. _ In Bohol, Resolution 2003-235 was unanimously passed by the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan declaring the province free of GMO to
protect the ecological balance of the province and health safety of
Boholanos from the adverse effects of GMOs. The resolution was
followed by Provincial Ordinance 2003-010, known as the “Safeguards
against GMOs,” which cnumerated the conditions against the entry of
Genetically Modified (GM) plants, animals and microorganisms into
the province.

b. The provinces of Oriental Mindoro and Marinduque as part of the
‘Organic Haven Island of MIMAROPA, both have Provincial
Environmental Code and Administrative Order banning the envy of
GMOs in their areas.

c. In 2007, Negros Occidental passed Provincial Ordinance 2007-007 or
“The Safeguard Against Living Genetically-Modified Organisms” in line
of the province’s goal of becoming the organic food bowl of Asia. Along
with Negros Oriental, Negros Occidental signed in a memorandum of
agreement committing to 10% island-wide organic production by the
year 2010 and to the banning of GMOs.

d. Some towns in Iloilo and Davao City have expressed their
apprehension on the ongoing field testing in their area and have
called for the suspension of planting BT eggplant, a geneucally
modified crop

The Philippines has a rich agrobiodiversity, with rice varieties numbering to
more than 4,000 kinds, Yet, the threat from genetically engineered crops and food
products is fast rising, Currently, the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI},
in partnership with the Philippine Rice Research Institute (Philrice) is field testing
Golden Rice or Vitamin A Rice in experimental farms in Nueva Ecija. Golden Rice is
a genetically engineered (GE) rice that contains beta-carotene to produce Vitamin


A. Alleged). i) is berg, di
defiaency However
promotion of Goldec
bio-diversity and
malnutrition

este toaddress the probleri at Vinurin 4
organiatiais asserted that the development and
sromdusthial miudel of arneulture that Lmits
s detar diversificanon, which primarily — ceases

Genetically modified tied alse poses fish fo consumers. as more tnd caare
independent scentitic experiments reveal that MOs may cite health problems.
However. risk assessments dune in the country are inadequate and only on a case
to-ease basis. anid will be done only af a GM product is suspected to produce
unwanted effects 1u health and the enuronment There is also a clamor on how the
country is regulating the entry or approval of GMOs To date, there are abou: 67
JO8 approved for diceer use as fond, feed and processing, While countnes i
urope and China has vither banned or put a moratorium on GMOs se ase
protect their crups from GM contemmranen

The filing of Uhis bill docs no: mean that the author is agamst the use of
serence and technology int fead and aaneulture, Gn the contrary, the propcnent
firmly believes that science should serve the people and society, and nor of the few
Setence and technologies) advancement should not cause harm and damaye 10
both people and the environment. The known and suspected environmental and
health risks related 10 unchecked rave to embrace the unproven technology of
genetic engineering should nut be underestimated. Other countries have acted
through legislation to protect theic citizens and environments from the threat of
genctically engineered crops and food. Clearly, we must do the same.

Gene
the crisis of hunger and malnutrnon today. The answer lies in our stu:
changes in the acce:

engineering in food and agriculture is not the answer to overe ame
varal
to land. food wind productive resources and political power.
mbined with ecological lcchnolowies vit farmer-led research and development as
well as harnessinis idizcious knowledge and participatory technotogy develop:nent
across sectors including the crucial rule of women in agricullure. According te Dr
Michael Hansen, a Senior CS scwnust and ecitical of genete engineeriny in
agreullure. “genotionty sod » panacea for foud seeuritn. Rather,
the answer to food securitis hos wai small seat. ecologically rattonal, sustain vble
aarculure that factses ¢

uf crops are noth

cal fond sresteris

In sew of the foregoiny, the dhscussion and approval of the essence and
intent of this measure is earnestly Souuht

REP. RAFAEL V, MARIANO


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
‘Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
Third Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO.

INTRODUCED BY ANAKPAWIS PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVE
RAFAEL V. MARIANO

AN ACT
PROHIBITING THE USE OF PRODUCTS CONTAINING
GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOs}
IN PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURE,
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

Section 1. Short Title. This Act shall be known as the “GMO-Free Agriculture Act
of 2012."

Section 2. Declaration of Policy. It is hereby declared the policy of the State to
protect and advance the right of the people to a safe poison-free agriculture, secure
livelihood, a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and
harmony of nature

To this end, the State shall follow the precautionary principle in relation to
the field testing of genetically-engineered crops and the processing and distribution
of seeds, crops and food products consisting of, containing or derived from
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) so as to protect the people, the country’s
agriculture and environment for the sake of present and future generations. The
possible harmful effects of genetically modified crops and food on human health
and environment are irreversible. Thus, the burden of proof as to the safe use of
GMOs must be on the proponents of genetic engincering in agriculture.

Section 3. Scope. This Act shall cover the release, field testing, processing and
sale of crops and food products containing genetically modified organisms (GMO) in
the country.

Section 4. Definition of Terms. For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall
be understood as follows:

1. ‘DNA? refers to deoxyribonucleic acid, a very long molecular
structure, consisting of a string of units or genes that encode all the


information regarding the structure and functioning of a living
organism for its entire lifespan, as well as biological information that is
passed on from one generation to the next.

2. ‘Field Testing” refers to the deliberate release or intentional
: introduction into a controlled environment of a GMO or a combination
of GMOs with provisions for containment such as physical barriers, or
a combination of physical barriers together with chemical and/or
biological barriers used to limit their contact with the general
population and the environment.

3. ‘Genetically modified organism" (GMO) means an organism in which
the genetic material has been altered or modified in a way that does not
occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination.

4. ‘Genetically modified crops and products” refers to the harvests and
commodities consisting cf, or containing a GMO or a combination of
GMOs.

5. ‘Genetic engineering’ is also called genetic modification, It is the term
given to the manipulation in the laboratory of the genctic code of a
living organism, plant or animal involving the introduction of foreign
DNA or synthetic genes into the organism.

6. ‘National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines” refers to an
attached agency of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST}
created by virtue of Executive Order 430 (s. 1990) and tasked, among
others, to identify potential risks associated with experiments involving
GMOs and to recommend measures to minimize such risks.

7. “Organism” means any biological entity capable of replication or of
transferring genetic material.

8. "Precautionary principle” is a precept that any action should not
pursued if the consequence is not certain or potentially dangerous.

9. “Processing” means the breeding, preparation and other activities
which through physical or chemical or biological processes alter the
exterior texture or form or inner substance of a product in such manner
as to prepare it for special use to which it could not have put in its
original form or condition.

10. “Precautionary risk assessment” means to identify and evaluate the
potential adverse effects of living modified organisms which the
Geliberate release of GMOs into the environment may pose. It should be
carried out in a scientifically sound and transparent manner.

11. “Sale” refers to the act of selling and/or supplying and/or making a
product available to other parties.

SECTION §. Prohibition. The release, laboratory and field testing, processing, sale
and similar acts, of crops and food products consisting of, containing or derived
from genetically modified organisms {GMOs}, shall be prohibited in the country


SECTION 6. Exempting Clause. Studies on crops and products containing
genctically modified organisms by the independent panel of scientists to be selected
and supervised by the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP)
and Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) together with concerned non-
government and people’s organizations shall be exempted from the prohibition

SECTION 7. Existing GMO Products. The National Committee on Biosafety of the
Philippines (NCBP), in coordination with Department of Agriculture (DA), Food and
Drugs Administration (FDA) and non-government organizations involved in
monitoring genetically modified crops and products, is hereby directed to determine
existing GMO products at its various levels: under laboratory testing, pilot testing,
multiple location testing or if it is already into commercial distribution in the
Philippines prior to the effectivity of this Act, and thereafter issue a list of said
products to the public, make a precautionary risk assessment of the same and
come out with recommendations on the proper disposition of such products. The
subsequent sale, processing, laboratory and field testing, release and similar acts,
of such products in the list shall be prohibited indefinitely until such time that said
products have been declared free from genetically modificd organisms.

SECTION 8. Monitoring. A monitoring committee composed of the Department of
Trade and Industry (DTI), Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Health
(DOH), Department of Science and Technology (DOST), Bureau of Customs (BOC),
non-government organization/s and people’s organization/s shall closely monitor
the sale, processing of products consisting of, containing or derived from genetically
engineered organisms. The monitoring committee shal! recommend for disposition
of any product found to be containing genetically-engineered organisms.

SECTION 9, Penatties. Any person or persons found violating the provisions of
this Act shall be penalized with imprisonment of not less than five (5) years and not
more than fifteen (15) years and a fine of not less than One Hundred Thousand
Pesos (PhP 100,000.00) but not more than One Million Pesos (PhP 1,000,000.00),
at the discretion of the court depending on the gravity of the offense. Repetition of
the offense shall entail maximum limit of the penalty and fine.

SECTION 10. Implementing Rules and Regulations. Within nincty (90) days
from the effectivity of this Act and after initiating a highly consultative process
involving sectoral representations, the National Committee on Biosafety of the
Philippines (NCBP), Department of Agriculture (DA) and Food and Drugs
Administration (FDA) shall formulate and publish the implementing rules and
regulations for the effective implementation of this Act.

SECTION 11. Separability Clause. If for any reason that any section or provision
of this Act shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other provisions which
are not affected thereby shall remain valid.

SECTION 12. Repeating Clause. All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and
regulations and other issuances or parts thereof which are inconsistent with this
Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 13. Effectivity Clause. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after
its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved.