CELEX: 52005PC0164
Language: en
Date: 2005-04-26
Title: Proposal for a Council Decision concerning the provisional prohibition of the use and sale in Greece of genetically modified spring swede rape (Brassica napus L. ssp. oleifera) derived from transformation event Topas 19/2, pursuant to Directive 2001/18/EC

Important legal notice

|

52005PC0164

Proposal for a Council Decision concerning the provisional prohibition of the use and sale in Greece of genetically modified spring swede rape (Brassica napus L. ssp. oleifera) derived from transformation event Topas 19/2, pursuant to Directive 2001/18/EC  /* COM/2005/0164 final */  

	Brussels, 26.4.2005COM(2005) 164 finalProposal for aCOUNCIL DECISIONconcerning the provisional prohibition of the use and sale in Greece of genetically modified spring swede rape ( Brassica napus L. ssp. oleifera ) derived from transformation event Topas 19/2, pursuant to Directive 2001/18/EC(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM1. Concerning the placing on the market of genetically modified spring swede rape ( Brassica napus L. ssp. oleifera ) derived from transformation event Topas 19/2, it has been decided by Commission Decision 98/291/EC of 22 April 1998, pursuant to Council Directive 90/220/EEC, that consent shall be given for the placing on the market of the product.2. On 9 June 1998 the authorities of the United Kingdom granted consent for the placing on the market of that product.3. Pursuant to Article 35(1) of Directive 2001/18/EC which replaced Directive 90/220/EEC procedures in respect of notifications concerning the placing on the market of genetically modified organisms which have not been completed by17 October 2002 are subject to the provisions of Directive 2001/18/EC.4. In accordance with Article 16 of Directive 90/220/EEC, the Greek authorities informed the Commission on 3 November 1998 of their decision to provisionally prohibit the use and sale of the genetically modified spring swede rape in question and gave reasons therefore.5. The Scientific Committee on Plants considered that the information submitted by Greece did not constitute new relevant scientific evidence which had not been taken into account during the original evaluation of the dossier and which would occasion a review of its original opinion on this product.6. On 5 March 2004 Greece submitted to the Commission additional information in support of its national measures concerning spring swede rape derived from transformation event Topas 19/2.7. The European Food Safety Authority considered that the information submitted by Greece did not constitute new scientific evidence which would invalidate the environmental risk assessment of spring swede rape derived from transformation event Topas 19/2 and therefore would justify a prohibition of the use and sale of this product in Greece.8. Under such circumstances Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC requires the Commission to take a decision in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 30(2) of the Directive to which Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.9. Since both the Scientific Committee on Plants as well as the EFSA considered that the product did not constitute a risk to human health or the environment the Commission prepared a draft Decision asking Greece to repeal its measures concerning spring swede rape derived from transformation event Topas 19/2.10. The draft Decision was submitted, in accordance with Article 5(2) of Decision 1999/468/EC, for opinion, to the Committee set up under Article 30 of Directive 2001/18/EC.11. No opinion was delivered by the Committee, following its consultation, on29 November 2004, which requires that, the Commission, in accordance with Article 5(4) of Decision 1999/468/EC, shall, without delay, submit to the Council a proposal relating to the measures to be taken and shall inform the European Parliament.12. Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC provides that the Council may, where appropriate in view of any such position, act by qualified majority within a period set at three months in accordance with Article 30(2) of Directive 2001/18/EC. If within that three-month period, the Council has indicated by qualified majority that it opposes the proposal, the Commission shall re-examine it; whereas if, on expiry of that period the Council has neither adopted the proposed implementing act nor indicated its opposition, then the proposed implementing act shall be adopted by the Commission.Proposal for aCOUNCIL DECISIONconcerning the provisional prohibition of the use and sale in Greece of genetically modified spring swede rape ( Brassica napus L. ssp. oleifera ) derived from transformation event Topas 19/2, pursuant to Directive 2001/18/EC(Text with EEA relevance)(Only the Greek text is authentic)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC[1], and in particular Article 23(2) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission[2],Whereas:(1) By Commission Decision 98/291/EC of 22 April 1998 concerning the placing on the market of genetically modified spring swede rape (Brassica napus L. ssp . oleifera) , pursuant to Council Directive 90/220/EEC[3] it has been decided that consent shall be given for the placing on the market of the product.(2) On 9 June 1998 the competent authorities of the United Kingdom granted consent for the placing on the market of that product.(3) Pursuant to Article 35(1) of Directive 2001/18/EC which replaced Directive 90/220/EEC[4] procedures in respect of notifications concerning the placing on the market of genetically modified organisms which have not been completed by17 October 2002 are subject to the provisions of Directive 2001/18/EC.(4) On 3 November 1998 Greece informed the Commission of its decision to provisionally prohibit the use and sale of the genetically modified spring swede rape in question and gave reasons therefore in accordance with Article 16(1) of Directive 90/220/EEC.(5) The Scientific Committee on Plants considered that the information submitted by Greece did not constitute new relevant scientific evidence which had not been taken into account during the original evaluation of the dossier and which would occasion a review of its original opinion on this product.(6) On 5 March 2004 Greece submitted to the Commission additional information in support of its national measures concerning spring swede rape derived from transformation event Topas 19/2.(7) The European Food Safety Authority considered that the information submitted by Greece did not constitute new scientific evidence which would invalidate the environmental risk assessment of spring swede rape derived from transformation event Topas 19/2 and therefore would justify a prohibition of the use and sale of this product in Greece.(8) Under the circumstances there is no reason to consider that the product constitutes a risk to human health or the environment.(9) Greece should therefore repeal those measures.(10) No opinion was delivered by the Committee established under Article 30 of Directive 2001/18/EC on the measures laid down in a draft Commission Decision, following the Committee’s consultation, on 29 November 2004, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 30(2) of that Directive,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 1The measures taken by Greece to prohibit the use and sale of genetically modified spring swede rape authorised for placing on the market by Decision 98/291/EC are not justified under the provisions of Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC.Article 2Greece shall take the necessary steps to comply with this Decision at the latest 20 days after its notification.Article 3This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.Done at Brussels,For the CouncilThe President 

[1] OJ L 106, 17.4.2001, p. 1.

[2] OJ C […], […], p. […].

[3] OJ L 131, 5.5.1998, p. 26.

[4] OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.