News

Whilst the deregulation of GM plants produced using new techniques of genetic modification (GMO/NGT) was adopted on 17 June 2026, experts from several Member States had, as early as 2023, expressed their doubts and disagreements regarding the assumptions put forward by the European Commission. They were also disappointed for not having been consulted before the legislative proposal was drafted. Despite this, their objections fell on deaf ears.

In August 2026, Mexico became the first country to authorize the commercial sale of a fungicide containing an interfering RNA (RNAi) as its active ingredient. This is not the first commercially approved product to utilize such molecules. The best-known example remains Calantha – developed by the same company, GreenLight Biosciences – which is designed to combat the Colorado potato beetle. This article provides a brief overview of the current status of RNAi-based pesticides.

A patent enables its holder to “protect” an invention and thus to control its use by third parties. Third parties may, however, use the invention if they sign a licence agreement. In the field of biotechnology, this issue becomes particularly sensitive. In addition to the problems of ownership of living organisms raised by patents, a single plant may also be covered by several patents held by different parties. The situation becomes complicated for anyone wishing to use an “invention”. The new European regulation on GMOs produced using new techniques falsely claims to facilitate access to licences. But what exactly is a licence, what does it cover, and under what conditions can it be granted?

Last July, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity continued their negotiations on the implementation of the multilateral mechanism for the sharing of benefits arising from DSI, of which the Cali Fund is the main financial instrument. The discussions resulted in a recommendation ahead of COP17, to be held in late October in Yerevan (Armenia). The crucial issue of defining DSI was not on the agenda. Talks are therefore continuing without any clarity on exactly what they are addressing, which suggests that their conclusions will be applied in a piecemeal manner.

In the United States, a legal battle between two seed companies, Corteva and Inari, has highlighted a contradiction in the patent system. Whilst intended to encourage innovation in exchange for the disclosure of inventions, patents can also complicate access to the biological material needed for research and the creation of new varieties. In May 2026, the US Department of Justice intervened to highlight the competition and innovation issues linked to access to patented seeds. However, the dispute will not proceed to trial, as the companies signed an out-of-court settlement on 27 September 2026, the main terms of which remain confidential. A missed opportunity to obtain judicial clarification on the use of patented biological material by a third party.

Unlike the European Union, in the United States, GMOs produced using new techniques of genetic modification (NGTs) are subject to federal legislation on GMOs. They may be subject to a risk assessment and, since 2018, to labelling and traceability requirements. Although the US administration sought to deregulate them in 2020, a court ruling in December 2024 cancelled this exemption.

In late July 2026, an article published in the journal Science revealed, more than a year after the event took place, the death of a six-year-old girl following a gene therapy trial in China. This therapy was based on new techniques of genetic modification (so-called new genomic techniques – NGT) and used viral vectors to deliver the gene modifying material to the target cells.

On Monday, September 21, 2026, at the Montpellier Court, the seat reserved for Syngenta’s lawyer was empty. And with good reason: the multinational – a subsidiary of the Chinese holding company Sinochem – had decided to withdraw its appeal against the civil-court acquittal won by the Faucheurs volontaires in the initial trial in Perpignan in […]

The European Commission wants to deregulate genetically modified bacteria, yeasts and viruses in order to reduce the time it takes for them to be placed on the market, the risk assessments carried out on them, and the information provided to operators and the public… This is the package of measures proposed from December 2025! Under the guise of a so-called urgent need for action, the Commission has cut corners by failing to consult the public on this issue and by withholding certain documents, including a key “impact assessment”.