European Commission

In March 2024, the European Commission announced measures aimed at driving what it called a “biotechnology revolution”, including a proposal for a “law” in 2025. This announcement came at a time when a number of legislative dossiers relating to biotechnology had already reached an impasse, such as the deregulation of plant GMOs. As Denmark, a fervent supporter of biotechnology, prepares to take over the Presidency of the Council of the EU from July 2025, is the Commission planning to bring everything together in a general “biotech law” to complicate political debates and force the issue through? The European Parliament has just taken up the issue on its own initiative.

Algae are the surprise guest in the European Commission’s deregulation proposal. How are these organisms used by the industry? In which countries are they produced? And above all, what genetic modifications are being made for which comercialisation? This overview is of importance because, according to the European Commission, their deregulation – like that of other plant GMOs – would be justified by the “evidence […] on the safety” of these GMOs. However, these GM algae do not exist, as the technical protocols are not yet mastered…

The algae that live in rivers and the sea have been the focus of a great deal of attention in recent years. Whether micro, macro, green, brown, red… they are currently at the heart of an industrial development project for which the European Commission is active. These GMO algae could be deregulated if the European Commission’s July 2023 proposal were to be approved, as they will undergo genetic modification to be transformed into production facilities for pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, food and agrofuels. This article is a first dive into a world that has gone unnoticed until now.

In July 2023, the proposal to deregulate GMOs obtained using new genetic modification techniques (known as “new genomic techniques” – NGTs) highlighted a sensitive issue that is still under discussion: patents. Patents are fiercely criticised for their many negative effects on the rights of farmers and traditional seed producers, as well as on biodiversity. A report commissioned by the European Green Party addresses this issue and suggests ways out of the impasse.

In January 2025, Poland, president of the Council of Europe, put a proposal on the table of EU member states to “solve” the patent problem that had arisen in the debate on deregulating GMOs obtained by new techniques. Complex and of uncertain effectiveness, the Polish proposal has plunged everyone into doubt. Discussions on this text may therefore not be concluded before Denmark, whose government supports total deregulation of GMOs, takes over the presidency of the European Union.

For a year and a half, the Council of the European Union has been unable to reach an agreement on the deregulation of GMOs, mainly because of the problems posed by patents on those GMOs or on the techniques used to obtain them. According to Copa-Cogeca, those two issues should be dealt with separately. Its proposal is to adopt the deregulation of GMOs as quickly as possible and postpone the study of the problem posed by patents. Even if it means forgetting that farmers are indeed affected by patents.

At a time when the European Union is preparing new regulations on seeds, a look at the meetings between MEPs and the various stakeholders indirectly shows the weight of the multinationals in these procedures. This raises questions about the imbalance in the representation of these parties and the potential consequences for small seed companies, farmers and peasants.

Mon810 maize is the only transgenic GM plant authorized for commercial cultivation in the European Union. This authorization was initially granted, via France, almost 30 years ago, in 1998, for an initial period of 10 years. A renewal application was submitted in 2007. Since then, no decision has been taken by the European authorities. How this maize, which authorization theoretically expired in 2008, can still be grown legally in Europe? Simply because European law accepts that, as long as the European Commission has not responded to a request for renewal, the initial authorization remains valid. To date, it’s been 15 years that the Commission fails to respond to Bayer/Monsanto’s request.

In less than a year and a half, from May 3, 2022 to October 12, 2023, the previous European Commission has launched a number of legislative initiatives concerning the Living. The deregulation of GMOs, the digitization of living organisms and even patents are just some of the issues on the table of member states and the European Parliament. If adopted, these projects will make it easier for companies with substantial financial, human and technical resources to take ownership of the Living. These initiatives do echo current international negotiations.

During the parliamentary work on the proposal for a European regulation on plant reproductive material, known as the “seeds regulation”, a question arose: should so-called “non-targeted mutagenesis” be considered as an “essentially biological process”? As these processes are excluded from patentability, the question may seem important. But such a decision would not be without consequences for the regulation of GMOs.

While the European Union has been discussing GMO deregulation since July 2023, European and French scientific experts have been and continue to be quite ignored. In France, although the opinion of the Anses was required as early as 2021, its publication took place in March 2024, a month after the vote by MEPs. The latter decided to consult their european experts after the vote, rather than before. However, in order to deliver its opinion in July 2024, the EFSA will make an exception to its procedure: it will not organize a public consultation…