www.checkbiotech.org ; www.raupp.info ; www.czu.cz

The European Commission has decided to refer France to the European Court of
Justice a second time for failure to comply with a judgement by the Court
from 2003 over biotechnology legislation, February 2006.

Despite the Court ruling and subsequent warnings from the Commission,
France has still only adopted partial national legislation to give effect to
an EU law on the safe handling of genetically modified micro-organisms.

This law aims at protecting the environment and human health against
potential dangers of biotech laboratory experiments where such organisms are
used. The Commission will also ask the Court to impose a daily fine of ?168
800 on France to apply from the day of a second judgement by the Court in
this matter.

In spite of a judgement delivered by the European Court of Justice on 27
November 2003, France has failed to correctly and fully transpose the
Directive on the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms
(GMMs) into national law. Following the judgement, the Commission has sent
several letters to the French authorities reminding them of the need to
ensure that a system for the safe use of GMMs is put into place.

As foreseen under the EU Treaty, the Commission will ask the Court to impose
a daily financial penalty on France. It proposes a daily sum of ?168 800.
The penalty would be finally set by the Court and would apply from the day
France is condemned by the Court of Justice for a second time in this case.

The GMM Directive

The GMM Directive regulates research and industrial activities involving,
for example, genetically modified viruses or bacteria under conditions of
containment, such as in laboratories.

In its national legislation, France has failed to ensure:

that emergency plans are drawn up for the nearby population in the event of
an accident,
that emergency services are made aware of the hazards,
that the public is informed about the safety measures in place and the
correct behaviour to adopt in case of accident,
that information which may harm the competitive position of the company
applying for authorisation may be kept confidential.

France has also failed to transpose the Directive in respect of certain uses
by the ministry of defence.

Legal Process

Standard procedure

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action
against a Member State that is not respecting its obligations.

If the Commission considers that there may be an infringement of EU law that
warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "Letter of
Formal Notice" (first written warning) to the Member State concerned,
requesting it to submit its observations by a specified date, usually two
months.

In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the Member State
concerned, the Commission may decide to address a "Reasoned Opinion" (final
written warning) to the Member State. This clearly and definitively sets out
the reasons why it considers there to have been an infringement of EU law
and calls upon the Member State to comply within a specified period,
normally two months.

If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the
Commission may decide to bring the case before the European Court of
Justice. Where the Court of Justice finds that the Treaty has been
infringed, the offending Member State is required to take the measures
necessary to conform.

?Follow-up? procedure

Article 228 of the Treaty gives the Commission power to act against a Member
State that does not comply with a previous judgement of the European Court
of Justice, again by issuing a first written warning (?Letter of Formal
Notice?) and then a second and final written warning (?Reasoned Opinion?).
The article then allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a
financial penalty on the Member State concerned.

[europa.eu.int]

------------------------------------------
Posted to Phorum via PhorumMail