Human Rights Court Dismisses Food Sovereignty Ghana's Case Against National Biosafety Authority

The Human Rights Court in Accra has dismissed the case brought by Food Sovereignty Ghana (FSG) against the National Biosafety Authority (NBA). This legal battle, which has spanned nearly a decade, revolved around the contentious issue of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Ghana. Since 2015, FSG, a vocal advocacy group dedicated to promoting food sovereignty and sustainable agriculture, has been at the forefront of challenging the NBA’s procedures and decisions regarding the approval and regulation of GMOs. The group argued that the NBA's processes lacked transparency and posed potential risks to the environment and public health. FSG’s concerns were rooted in the belief that GMOs could negatively impact biodiversity, undermine local farming practices, and lead to health risks that had not been sufficiently studied. The group sought greater accountability and stricter regulations on GMO approvals to ensure the safety and well-being of Ghanaians and their environment. The NBA, established under the Biosafety Act of 2011, is the regulatory body responsible for overseeing the use of GMOs in Ghana. Its mandate includes ensuring that the development, testing, and commercialization of GMOs are conducted safely and in accordance with international best practices. In its ruling, the High Court found that the NBA had adhered to its regulatory framework and that there was insufficient evidence to support FSG's claims of non-transparency and potential environmental and health risks. The court's decision effectively upholds the NBA’s authority and processes regarding GMO regulation in the country. The dismissal of the case is a significant development in the ongoing debate over GMOs in Ghana. Proponents of GMOs argue that genetically modified crops can boost agricultural productivity, enhance food security, and improve the livelihoods of farmers by making crops more resistant to pests and diseases. They contend that GMOs are a critical tool in addressing the challenges of a growing population and changing climate. Opponents, however, remain wary of the long-term impacts of GMOs. They caution against potential ecological disruptions, loss of agricultural biodiversity, and unforeseen health consequences. FSG and other like-minded organizations have advocated for a precautionary approach, calling for rigorous, independent studies and greater public involvement in the decision-making process. In response to the ruling, a spokesperson for FSG expressed disappointment but vowed to continue their advocacy. "While we respect the court's decision, we remain committed to our cause. The fight for food sovereignty and sustainable agriculture is far from over," they stated. The NBA welcomed the court's decision, reiterating its commitment to ensuring the safe and responsible use of biotechnology in Ghana. "We are pleased with the court’s ruling, which affirms our dedication to transparency and safety in our regulatory processes. We will continue to work towards achieving food security and improving agricultural productivity in Ghana," the CEO of the National Biosafety said. As the debate over GMOs continues, this ruling marks a pivotal moment in Ghana’s journey towards balancing technological advancement with environmental stewardship and public health. Both sides agree that the ultimate goal is a sustainable and secure food system for all Ghanaians. The challenge lies in navigating the complexities and uncertainties inherent in achieving this goal. This Article was written by Raymond Agalga, A Research Scientist and a Member of the Biotechnology Forum of Ghana.