Stop Parliament Before It Is Too Late!

Read Article

Comments (21)

This article is closed for comments.

Read Comments Comments (21)

Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro. 10 years ago

Here is the full text of the Petition:

PETITION TO PARLIAMENT ON THE PLANT BREEDERS' BILL, 2013.

To:

Rt. Hon. Speaker of the House,

Honourable Chairperson of Committee on Constitutional, Legal, and Parliamentary A ...
read full comment

Here is the full text of the Petition:

PETITION TO PARLIAMENT ON THE PLANT BREEDERS' BILL, 2013.

To:

Rt. Hon. Speaker of the House,

Honourable Chairperson of Committee on Constitutional, Legal, and Parliamentary Affairs,

Honourable Members of Parliament,

Copy to:

The Clerk to Parliament,

Media Houses.

PETITION ON THE PLANT BREEDERS' BILL, 2013.

We, the undersigned, representatives of the respective civil society, religious, and political organisations,

NOTING WITH DISMAY that the Plant Breeders' Bill currently before Parliament has moved to the Consideration Stage;

DESIROUS to urgently contribute to the debate in order to help ensure the rights of the small farmer are not trampled upon in our zeal to protect the rights of the plant breeder;

CONCERNED that the Bill, as it stands, contains clauses that have serious implications on our sovereignty as a people, including unacceptable limitations on the policy space it leaves for the state to regulate the activities of plant breeders vis-à-vis measures to protect public health and the natural environment;

DEEPLY TROUBLED that the Bill, as it stands, facilitates bio piracy in that it does not require a breeder to disclose the origin of the genetic material used to develop the variety it wishes to protect and neither does it provide mechanisms for prior informed consent and access and benefit sharing, although African nations have championed these mechanisms in various international forums.

ALARMED that in the absence of these elements, the Bill sets up a framework for commercial breeders – most of which are likely to be foreign entities – to use local germplasm to develop varieties that are then exclusively appropriated by such breeders through the PVP system established by the regional legal framework:

WORRIED that the Bill will lead to erosion of crop diversity and thus reduce resilience to threats such as pests, disease or climate change.

FURTHER CONCERNED that the Bill hinders Ghana's ability to fulfil its commitments under the international Treaty on Plant Genetic Resource for Food and Agriculture in particular, to realise, protect, and promote farmers rights, including the right to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed and other propagating material, and to participate in decision-making regarding, and in the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture.

EAGER TO help block a reckless loop-hole that is bound to saddle us with huge judgement debts, as a nation, we particularly oppose Clause 23. This clause will, at best, present us with a dilemma of regulating the activities of the plant breeder for the sake of public health or the environment and face judgement debts, or accepting the right of the breeder and be damned. As it currently stands in Clause 23, a plant breeder's right is “independent of any measure taken by the Republic to regulate within Ghana the production, certification and marketing of material of a variety or the importation or exportation of the material”, irrespective of the consequences;

DO HEREBY PETITION THE HOUSE TO URGENTLY CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS:

(1) To add to Clause 9 (3)

The application for a plant breeder right:

-- shall be accompanied by an affidavit sworn by the applicant that such variety does not contain any gene or gene sequence involving terminator technology;

--shall contain a complete passport data of the parental lines from which the variety has been derived along with the geographical location from where the genetic material has been taken and all such information relating to the contribution, if any, of any farmer, village community, institution or organization in breeding, evolving or developing the variety;

--contain a declaration that the genetic material or parental material acquired for breeding, evolving or developing the variety has been lawfully acquired;

--shall be accompanied with the prior written consent of the authority representing the local community or the indigenous people in cases where the plant variety is developed from traditional varieties and evidence of fair and equitable benefit sharing;

--shall be supported by documents relating to the compliance of any law regulating activities involving genetically modified organisms in cases where the development of the plant variety involves genetic modification.

(2) To delete Clause 10 on presumption of protection.

This Clause puts the onus on the Plant Variety Protection office or the Registrar-General to proof that the right holder does not deserve protection. Actually the onus should be on the right holder to prove that its application meets the substantive and formal criteria.

(3) To amend Clause 16 to extend the period for objections.

A period of at least 9 months after publication of the application and any further time before the application is disposed of should be considered for a written objection to be made with regard to published application.

(4) Amend Clause 20 (1) to limit the scope of breeders rights to production for commercial marketing, offering for sale and marketing. This limits the scope to commercial activities while allowing on-commercial activities to continue.

(5) Delete Clause 20(3), (4) and (5)

These sections extend the scope of breeders' rights to harvested material and to essentially derived varieties. These provisions place significant restrictions on using protected varieties for research and breeding purposes thus limiting development of new varieties – especially by farmers who usually breed and adapt varieties to suit their local conditions.

(6) To add to Clause 20 the following:

Nothing contained in this Act shall prevent -

(a) the use of any variety registered under this Act by any person using such variety for conducting experiment or research; or

(b) the use of a variety by any person as an initial source of variety for the purpose of creating other varieties;

Provided that the authorization of the breeder of a registered variety is required where the repeated use of such variety as a parental line is necessary for commercial production of such other newly developed variety.

(7) To add a new section: Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no registration of a variety shall be made under this Act

(a) which may affect public order or morality; or

(b) where there is reasonable ground to believe that the cultivation, reproduction or any other use of that plant variety may produce a negative impact on the environment, human, animal and plant life.

(c) No variety of any genera or species which involves any technology which is injurious to the life or health of human beings, animals, plants or the environment shall be registered under this Act.

(8) To delete Clause 21 (c) and 21 (3)

Section 21(c ) is to be deleted as it refers to parts of Section 20 which are also proposed for deletion. Section 21 (3) limits farmers rights. It only allows farmers to use farm saved seed on their own holdings and this also may be subject to payment of royalty since the section speaks of safeguarding the legitimate interests of breeders. It does not allow farmers to freely exchange or sell seeds/propogating material.

(9) To add Clause 21 to expand farmers rights.

– a farmer shall be deemed to be entitled to save, use, sow, resow, exchange, share or sell his farm produce including seed or propagating material of a variety protected under this Act in the same manner as he was entitled before the coming into force of this Act :

Provided that the farmer shall not be entitled to sell branded seed of a variety protected under this Act.

Explanation : For the purposes of clause (iv), “branded seed” means any seed put in a package or any other container and labelled in a manner indicating that such seed is of a variety protected under this Act.

(10) Delete Clause 23 on Measures regulating commerce.

“A plant breeder right shall be independent of any measure taken by the Republic to regulate within Ghana the production, certification and marketing of material of a variety or the importation or exportation of the material.”

Please find in the appendices attached, detailed references and explanatory notes, and recitals of our reasons behind these proposed amendments.

Done, this Thursday, 21st November, 2013,

For Life, the Environment, and Social Justice!

Respectfully,
......................................
Name of Organisation: Food Sovereignty Ghana
Address: P.O. Box K272, Accra Newtown, Accra
Contact: Duke Nii Amartey Tagoe
Email: info@foodsovereigntyghana.org
Tel: +(0)277776686/+233(0)24264577

Website: /foodsovereigntyghana.org/

…....................................
Name of Organisation: African Centre for Biosafety, South Africa.
Address: PO Box 29170 Melville 2109, Gauteng, South Africa
Contact: Ms. Maraim Mayet
Email: mariammayet@mweb.co.za
Fax: +27(11) 486-1156
Website:/www.acbio.org.za/

NB: Other organisations who endorse this shall be contacting you on this.

APPENDIX

Detailed references and explanatory notes, and recitals of our reasons

For the sake of brevity, here are our notes for discussion points.

#(1) To add to Section 9 (3):

Section 9 (3) of the current Bill reads:

9. (1) A person may apply to the Registrar for the grant of a plant breeder right if that person is eligible in accordance with section 8.

(2) An application for the grant of a plant breeder right may be filed by the breeder of a new variety who is

(a) a citizen or who is resident in the country;

(b) a foreign citizen or a resident in the territory of a party to a treaty to which the Republic is party;

(c) a legal entity that has its registered office within the territory of a party to a treaty to which the Republic is party;

or

(d) a legal entity that has its registered office in the country.

(3) The application for a plant breeder right

(a) is subject to the payment of the prescribed fee; and

(b) shall contain the following details:

(i) the name and the address of the applicant,

(ii) the name and address of the person that has bred or discovered and developed a variety if it is different from the applicant,

(iii) the identification of the botanical taxon and the Latin or common name,

(iv) the generic designation proposed for the variety or a provisional designation,

(v) a technical description of the variety, and

(vi) any information, document or material required for the purposes of examination.

Our proposed amendment seeks to add to Section 9 (3)

The application for a plant breeder right:

-- shall be accompanied by an affidavit sworn by the applicant that such variety does not contain any gene or gene sequence involving terminator technology;

--shall contain a complete passport data of the parental lines from which the variety has been derived along with the geographical location from where the genetic material has been taken and all such information relating to the contribution, if any, of any farmer, village community, institution or organization in breeding, evolving or developing the variety;

--contain a declaration that the genetic material or parental material acquired for breeding, evolving or developing the variety has been lawfully acquired;

Reasons:

On gene sequence involving terminator technology

On informed consent and access and benefit sharing.

On ‘disclosure of origin’ provisions and mechanisms for benefit sharing

#(2) To delete Clause 10 on presumption of protection.

Currently reading:

10. (1) An applicant shall in the absence of any proof to the contrary, be presumed to be entitled to the protection of a plant breeder right under this Act.

(2) Where the application is made by the successor in title of the applicant, the applicant shall support the application with proof of the successor’s title.

the Plant Variety Protection office or the Registrar-General that the right holder does not deserve protection. Actually the onus should be on the right holder to prove that its application meets the substantive and formal criteria.

Reasons to be deleted:

This clause is bad because it puts the onus of proof on the Plant Variety Protection office or the Registrar-General that the right holder does not deserve protection. Actually the onus should be on the right holder to prove that its application meets the substantive and formal criteria.

#(3) To amend Clause 16 to extend the period for objections.

Currently reading:

Objection

16. (1) A person may object to the grant of a plant breeder right within sixty days after the publication in the Gazette or the Varieties Bulletin.

(2) The objection shall be made in writing and supported by the grounds of objection.

90 days or even six months grace period seem fairer for the purpose, as fairness ought to be a priority.

#(4) Amend Clause 20 (1) to limit the scope of breeders rights production for commercial marketing, offering for sale and marketing.

Currently reading:

20. (1) Subject to sections 21 and 22, the following acts in respect of propagating material of a protected variety require the authorisation of the breeder:

(a) production or reproduction;

(b) conditioning for the purpose of propagation;

(c) an offer for sale;

(d) sale or marketing;

(e) exportation;

(f) importation; and

(g) stocking for any of the purposes mentioned in paragraph (a) to (f).

#(5) Delete Clause 20(3), (4) and (5)

Currently reading:

(3) Subject to sections 21 and 22, the acts referred to in subsection

(1) as regards harvested material, including the whole of a plant and part of a plant obtained through the unauthorised use of the propagating material of the protected variety, shall require the authorisation of the breeder, unless the breeder has had a reasonable opportunity to exercise the right in relation to the propagating material.

(4) Subsections (1) and (2) apply in relation to the following:

(a) varieties which are not clearly distinguishable from the protected variety in accordance with section 5;

(b) a variety which is essentially derived from the protected variety where the protected variety is not itself an essentially derived variety; and

(c) a variety, the production of which requires the repeated use of the protected variety.

(5) For the purposes of subsection (4) (b), a variety shall be deemed to be essentially derived from another variety being the initial variety if it

(a) is predominantly derived from the initial variety, or from a variety that is itself predominantly derived from the initial variety, while retaining the expression of the essential characteristics that result from the genotype or combination of genotypes of the initial variety;

(b) is clearly distinguishable from the initial variety; and

(c) except for the differences which result from the act of derivation, conforms to the initial variety in the expression of the essential characteristics that result from the genotype or combination of genotypes of the initial variety.

(6) An essentially derived variety may be obtained for example by the selection of a

(a) natural mutant or induced mutant,

(b) somaclonal variant, or

(c) variant individual from a plant of the initial variety, back crossing or transformation by genetic engineering.

#(6) To add to Clause 20 the following:

Nothing contained in this Act shall prevent -

(a) the use of any variety registered under this Act by any person using such variety for conducting experiment or research; or

(b) the use of a variety by any person as an initial source of variety for the purpose of creating other varieties;

Provided that the authorization of the breeder of a registered variety is required where the repeated use of such variety as a parental line is necessary for commercial production of such other newly developed variety.

#(7) To add: Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no registration of a variety shall be made under this Act

(a) which may affect public order or morality; or

(b) where there is reasonable ground to believe that the cultivation, reproduction or any other use of that plant variety may produce a negative impact on the environment, human, animal and plant life.

(c) No variety of any genera or species which involves any technology which is injurious to the life or health of human beings, animals, plants or the environment shall be registered under this Act.

#(8) To delete Clause 21(c) and 21 (3)

Section 21(c ) is to be deleted as it refers to parts of Section 20 which are also proposed for deletion. Section 21 (3) limits farmers rights. It only allows farmers to use farm saved seed on their own holdings and this also may be subject to payment of royalty since the section speaks of safeguarding the legitimate interests of breeders. It does not allow farmers to freely exchange or sell

#((9) To add Clause 21 to expand farmers rights.

– a farmer shall be deemed to be entitled to save, use, sow, resow, exchange, share or sell his farm produce including seed or propagating material of a variety protected under this Act in the same manner as he was entitled before the coming into force of this Act :

Provided that the farmer shall not be entitled to sell branded seed of a variety protected under this Act.

Explanation : For the purposes of clause (iv), “branded seed” means any seed put in a package or any other container and labelled in a manner indicating that such seed is of a variety protected under this Act.

#(10) Delete Section 23 on Measures regulating commerce.

“A plant breeder right shall be independent of any measure taken by the Republic to regulate within Ghana the production, certification and marketing of material of a variety or the importation or exportation of the material.”

Reasons:

The rights of the plant breeder, or any other business activity for that matter, must end where issues of public health and the environment begins. This clause is fundamentally problematic as it calls on Parliament to legislate away the right to take “measures to regulate within Ghana the production, certification and marketing of material of a variety or the importation or exportation of the material”, even where there are compelling reasons to do so on behalf of public health or the environment.

There is no reason why our Parliament must be called upon to cede what they are obliged under oath to systematically, diligently, and directly, whenever this is needed.

What this law does is that it only provides an avenue for these giant corporations to raid our Treasury with judgement debts, under the bizarre pretext of “loss of business opportunity”. It is not only the possibility of systematic suits whenever we need to control our environment or public health, that makes this law dangerous. There is really no reason for the Parliament to cede this right to unelected business executives of multinational corporations of doubtful intentions and abilities.

We must not forget that Monsanto Corporation, the largest of the six giant corporations which control 90% of the market, has a strange history of producing dangerous materials. For instance, “Monsanto's dirty dozens”, provides thirteen examples of the ability of these companies to cause harm, if they could be left alone without any controls. These dangerous products from Monsanto alone include Saccharin, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), Polystyrene, Atom bomb and nuclear weapons, Dioxin, Aspartame (NutraSweet / Equal), Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), etc, etc. Here is a quote that should tell our Parliamentarians that Ghana is safer when Parliament to retain the right to oversight of any commercial venture on our territory:

“In 1944, Monsanto became one of the first manufacturers of the insecticide DDT to combat malaria-transmitting mosquitoes. Despite decades of Monsanto propaganda insisting that DDT was safe, the true effects of DDT’s toxicity were at last confirmed through outside research and in 1972, DDT was banned throughout the U.S.”

Here is another:

“During the early 1960s, Monsanto was one of the two primary manufacturers of Agent Orange, an herbicide / defoliant used for chemical warfare during the Vietnam War. Except Monsanto’s formula had dioxin levels many times higher than the Agent Orange produced by Dow Chemicals, the other manufacturer (which is why Monsanto was the key defendant in the lawsuit brought by Vietnam War veterans in the United States).” Read more: Monsanto’s Dirty Dozen: The 12 Most Awful Products Made By Monsanto /fracturedparadigm.com/2013/04/15/monsantos-dirty-dozen-the-12-most-awful-products-made-by-monsanto/#ixzz2lU6Ut6vi

Why should Ghana be required to cede our sovereignty over public health issues to corporations with a track record marketing dangerous products? What type of business proposal is this one?
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 10 years ago

Odikro, are you sure your MPs have got the guts not to approve this bill? Do you think they do not understand the bill in its current format? Even if there is support to stop this dangerous bill, all the multinationals will d ...
read full comment

Odikro, are you sure your MPs have got the guts not to approve this bill? Do you think they do not understand the bill in its current format? Even if there is support to stop this dangerous bill, all the multinationals will do is to give the (Dis)honourable Members designer mobile phones and they will approve THE bill to be signed into law by the President.
Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro. 10 years ago

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Kofi,

I'm glad you saw this!

What is going on today is a struggle as important as those of the Aborigines' Protection Rights Society. It is as important as ...
read full comment

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Kofi,

I'm glad you saw this!

What is going on today is a struggle as important as those of the Aborigines' Protection Rights Society. It is as important as the struggle against Slavery, Colonialism and Apartheid put together!

The chains of the 21st Century enslavement of Africa are being forged through the replacement of food by seed marketing corporations with the "substantial equivalents" of food that is genetically modified and patented. It is a theft of the commons by a handful of corporate entities of doubtful intentions.

The point often overlooked in all this is that these corporations control the seed market. And they are using this control to wipe out seeds that do not bring them profits. Thus we have a situation where farmers will have no choice, other than purchase genetically modified seeds under patents.

In a response to Nature on SEED MONOPOLIES, GMOS AND FARMERS SUICIDES IN INDIA, Dr Vandana Shiva wrote:

"Farmers’ suicides started in 1995 when globalization enabled seed MNCs like Monsanto to enter the Indian seed market and start establishing seed monopolies. The suicides have increased with the commercial sales of GMO Bt. cotton. Bt. cotton currently accounts for 95% of the cotton seeds commercially sold in India. Famers have adopted Bt. cotton not because it gave higher yields or gave them higher incomes, but because all alternatives have been destroyed.

Destruction of Choice

Farmers are not choosing Bt. cotton. They have no choice left. The systematic wiping out of non Bt. alternatives from the market and the aggressive marketing of Bt. cotton has created a monopoly. It is not profits, but deliberate destruction of alternatives that have pushed farmers into the Bt. cotton trap, and as a consequence, into the suicide trap. Farmers’ varieties are displaced through the very clever strategy termed as “seed replacement”. Public varieties have mysteriously stopped being released. And most Indian companies are locked into licensing arrangements with Monsanto, and can only sell Monsanto’s Bollgard Bt. cotton seeds."

If Ghanaians do not care about this, there is pretty little we can demand from our elected leaders. I have very little hope of success if there is no considerable public interest in this case. Hence the problem is essentially not from the Parliament, but the Ghanaian public and the nature of pressure we are able to assert on them.

It is easy to lose hope and resign one's fate to the second wave of slavery that is slowly visiting us through a few pieces of legislations by our own Parliament! Failure is not an option. This is a matter of life or death, as biohazards are known to cause great harm and can last longer than the effects of a nuclear disaster.

Every well-meaning Ghanaian must roll up the sleeves and, at least, talk to an MP BEFORE tomorrow morning!

Thank you Kofi. Please, join in the crusade. Don't give up hope too soon, even if the situation looks hopeless! We love our country too much to give up on her! We cannot give up on our own destiny! It is time that we all took concrete steps to become active participants of our history and join this struggle.

We cannot afford to be passive spectators and cynical observers!

Please, I want to send you a direct message. Could you kindly contact me at:

We shall overcome!

Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 10 years ago

Odikro, the simple fact is that this bill is unnecessary because there are already existing laws, rules and regulations at national, regional and international levels. They known as copy rights and patent laws to protect the ...
read full comment

Odikro, the simple fact is that this bill is unnecessary because there are already existing laws, rules and regulations at national, regional and international levels. They known as copy rights and patent laws to protect the work and inventions of others (both individuals/groups and corporate bodies.

What this seeks to do is to force poor developing countries to give their natural rights to their crops, food and medicines from the forests. After all these have been contaminated by genetically modified products, then the multinational companies will turn round and say, hey!, these no longer belong to you. We own them and your government passed a law to protect and give us ownership over them in 2013, so pay us before you can grow and harvest them.

Ghana or the developing world is sleep walking into selling their birth rights. Africa will be slaves again but this time to multinational and not individuals.
PUR'GU SAARPE! ESQ. 10 years ago

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Kofi,

Tomorrow, our Parliament is going to consider tying up our hands and round us up and give to these corporations for free! Sure, Ghana is sleep walking int ...
read full comment

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Kofi,

Tomorrow, our Parliament is going to consider tying up our hands and round us up and give to these corporations for free! Sure, Ghana is sleep walking into selling our birth rights.

Salman Rushdie wrote something I found difficult to swallow, in his book, The Satanic Verses: "Every oppressed people deserve their oppression"! If we don't deserve to be enslaved, and our Parliament is debating this, it should be imperative of every Ghanaian to make that crystal clear!

The task ahead is one of what we are doing about this urgent problem. There is a lot to be done. This is a well-planned attack on Ghana with strong local backers and useful idiots. And one thing they hate most is public awareness and participation in the process.

You write well. Please, help spread the word. Tell the Ghanaian public the perspectives you are sharing here and name and shame the political class responsible for this sell-out! I am writing another article to help keep the issue alive, but we need all the help we can get!

Sincerely,

Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro.
Kponyo 10 years ago

Kofi, very clearly you are also sleepwalking. This is evident from your concerns that Africa will be slaves again.

We took the turning on that dangerous road in 1966 and we have been recklessly speeding down that corridor ...
read full comment

Kofi, very clearly you are also sleepwalking. This is evident from your concerns that Africa will be slaves again.

We took the turning on that dangerous road in 1966 and we have been recklessly speeding down that corridor of no return and death ever since.

Today most Ghanaians are either unemployed spectators or employed workers earning slave wages in our own country.

Ghana has already become just another imperialist plantation for multinational organizations, their associates and their local pawns. Sad but true, ainit?
AMU 10 years ago

Thank you Nana Akyea Mensah!

Thank you Nana Akyea Mensah!
HMMMMMM 10 years ago

IEA advocates for a multi-party parliamentary Budget office to check Gov't spending
Source: Ghana|Myjoyonline.com|Ivy Benson
Date: 21-11-2013 Time: 02:11:58:pm
The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is calling for the e ...
read full comment

IEA advocates for a multi-party parliamentary Budget office to check Gov't spending
Source: Ghana|Myjoyonline.com|Ivy Benson
Date: 21-11-2013 Time: 02:11:58:pm
The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is calling for the establishment of a multi-party parliamentary Budget office to check over spending by government.

Addressing journalists on the 2014 budget, Senior Economists with the IEA, Dr John Kwakye expressed worry at the manner in which Ghana’s budget deficit rose from 4.8 percent in November 2011 to 11.8 percent by December 2012.

"Setting up an independent multi-party Parliamentary budget office will probably be the best way to do this.

"For example, it is unconscionable that in 2012, a budget deficit of 4.8%, which was announced in November the previous year in the budget presentation and which became 6.7% in the supplementary budget of July 2012, eventually ballooned to 11.8% in December 2012", Dr. Kwakye noted.

He therefore pointed out the need for government's attention to be drawn to what he called the "weak oversight of government's spending by Parliament" and called for anomaly to be rectified as soon as possible.

The Senior Economist with the IEA was further of the view that Parliament be blamed for the excesses since nobody was held responsible for the failures.
Akua 10 years ago

Please Ghanaians, let us be bold and protect our health, land and the Ghana God has given us. Let us not turn a blind eye to this.

Please Ghanaians, let us be bold and protect our health, land and the Ghana God has given us. Let us not turn a blind eye to this.
holy smoke 10 years ago

A lot of the parliamentarians do read outside or understand world issues. They went in for the money and will do anything depending on who is paying.
They took 5000 from the NPP government to sell Ghana telecom. How much ha ...
read full comment

A lot of the parliamentarians do read outside or understand world issues. They went in for the money and will do anything depending on who is paying.
They took 5000 from the NPP government to sell Ghana telecom. How much have they taken from Monsanto. There are important issues to deal with instead of doing the biddings of Multinationals.
JAMREAH 10 years ago

WARNING TOO ALL GHANAIANS CANADA AND MANY DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ARE STRONGLY AGAINST THE GMO.GHANA SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE THE GMO. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD RATHER INVITE THE ORGANIC FARMERS TO BRING US THE NATURAL VEGETABLES,FRUITS ...
read full comment

WARNING TOO ALL GHANAIANS CANADA AND MANY DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ARE STRONGLY AGAINST THE GMO.GHANA SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE THE GMO. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD RATHER INVITE THE ORGANIC FARMERS TO BRING US THE NATURAL VEGETABLES,FRUITS AND NUTS.
Gandalf 10 years ago

FRANKLY I AM SADDENED AT THIS TURN OF EVENTS. CLEARLY, UNLESS GOD INTERVENES WITH SOME WISDOM AND FORESIGHT FOR OUR PARLIAMENTARIANS, THEY WILL PASS THE BILL IN ITS PRESENT STATE. ONLY TO REGRET A FEW YEARS DOWN THE LINE WHEN ...
read full comment

FRANKLY I AM SADDENED AT THIS TURN OF EVENTS. CLEARLY, UNLESS GOD INTERVENES WITH SOME WISDOM AND FORESIGHT FOR OUR PARLIAMENTARIANS, THEY WILL PASS THE BILL IN ITS PRESENT STATE. ONLY TO REGRET A FEW YEARS DOWN THE LINE WHEN WE ARE SADDLED WITH JUDGEMENT DEBTS BECAUSE WE FIND THE WHOLE THING OPPRESSIVE AND ENSLAVING AND ALSO BECAUSE THEIR VERY RELATIVES BEGIN TO DEVELOP DISEASES FROM THESE FOODS THEY CANNOT CURE...CANCER RATES RISE... AND OUR FARMERS BEGIN REJECTING THE WHOLE THING.BUT REMEMBER, WHATEVER YOU SOW TODAY AS A PARLIAMENTARIAN, YOU WILL AND MUST REAP SOME DAY SOON. I REST MY CASE
Vuvuzela 10 years ago

Akyea, how are some of you addressing the attention of President of the Republic on the facts presented here? We want to assume he understands the imports of the Bill and going along to the detriment of the state?

I still ...
read full comment

Akyea, how are some of you addressing the attention of President of the Republic on the facts presented here? We want to assume he understands the imports of the Bill and going along to the detriment of the state?

I still resent all those child-brained representatives in parliament most of whom don't even know their reasons for being there apart from the exaggerated quest for money and affluence.

Even with clear parliamentary exigencies obliging parliament approbation of contracts, Kufuor had been able to sidestep recourse to it and awarded contracts that had created a series of judgment debt issues. I am sure some in parliament knew but were bought à priori. But should this be the reason to foist this Bill on us while we look on unconcerned? The despicable Bill would occasion another money-making process for those idiots backing it, let alone the evident perils it exposes. Disgusting.

Anyway we will hold the President responsible.
Nii Ayittey 10 years ago

Why did you wait 24 hours before the bill is voted on in parliament to ask public to contact MP's?

Why did you wait 24 hours before the bill is voted on in parliament to ask public to contact MP's?
Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro. 10 years ago

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Mr. Nii Ayittey,

Thank you for the question. The problem is Parliament gave very short notice! In fact, if we had not been looking for it, we would not even hav ...
read full comment

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hello Mr. Nii Ayittey,

Thank you for the question. The problem is Parliament gave very short notice! In fact, if we had not been looking for it, we would not even have known that this was going on. The moment we got to know, we had to put a lot of things together and contact the MPs ourselves first. It is only a few days ago!

We have been contacting the MPs ourselves and preparing the documents. This Bill was also sneaked in very rapidly. There has not been enough time to even prepare our petition to the best of our abilities!

It is not for nothing that they are trying to avoid public awareness and participation. It is the same thing going on all over the world. There are currently demonstrations in Mexico and Chile over this. Everyone is complaining of lack of public awareness and haste to pass the Bill!

It has been said that " The ONLY reason for hurry, the ONLY reason to rush these PVP laws through is to benefit the multinational Big Ag corporations. They need these laws passed BEFORE people catch on and BEFORE democratic processes can react. They know if people understand what is going on they will reject these laws. There is NO OTHER NEED for these laws."

Just like in the US, Big Ag and its enablers are trying to get ahead of the democratic process and lock people into their grip. They want to get the laws in place before people know what is happening.

Let them not get way with it!

Sincerely,

Pur'gu Saarpe! Esq.,
Secretary to The Odikro.
AMU 10 years ago

Please provide contact numbers of MPs, the President, his vice, cabinet, chief of staff etc, for the public to call. Thanks.

Please provide contact numbers of MPs, the President, his vice, cabinet, chief of staff etc, for the public to call. Thanks.
PUR'GU SAARPE! ESQ. 10 years ago

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hi Amu,
This is a very good idea. This struggle requires the participation and the creativity of all of us. It also requires our time. We must not sit down and be spoon ...
read full comment

OFFICE OF THE ODIKRO
a companion of the black star!

Hi Amu,
This is a very good idea. This struggle requires the participation and the creativity of all of us. It also requires our time. We must not sit down and be spoon-fed!

It is nice that you have this idea, but what prevents you from asking around, finding out yourself and sharing? Is Nana Akyea Mensah the only Ghanaian who must spoon-feed us with every necessary information on this matter?

I am appealing to the members of the public to volunteer the information needed if they have it. I have tried and searched but it appears our representatives are busy hiding themselves from us. No contacts are available even on the website of Parliament!

Sincerely,

Pur'gu Saarpe! Esq.,
Secretary to the Odikro.
PKA 10 years ago

Better late than never! Thanks Odikro. We have to take these corrupt MP's to task before they they do us in with this GM trash. All is takes is just something "small" for these "honourable" clowns and BINGO, they would be mo ...
read full comment

Better late than never! Thanks Odikro. We have to take these corrupt MP's to task before they they do us in with this GM trash. All is takes is just something "small" for these "honourable" clowns and BINGO, they would be more than willing to endorse the death warrant of every Ghanaian.
Sethlena Asante, Uk 10 years ago

Please Parliament passing plant breeders bill means a death warrant for Ghanaians.Other COUNTRIES HAVE REJECTED IT, WHY NOT GHANA.Think about our peasant farmer.If its a good idea why does it has to be pass as bill

Please Parliament passing plant breeders bill means a death warrant for Ghanaians.Other COUNTRIES HAVE REJECTED IT, WHY NOT GHANA.Think about our peasant farmer.If its a good idea why does it has to be pass as bill
OKOE 10 years ago

THE EUROPEANS HAVE BANNED THIS MOSANTO PRODUCTS AND THE GOVERNMENT MUST BE CAREFUL WITH THIS BILL OR IT WILL BRING HAVOCK ON GHANA IN AGRICULTURE IN THE FUTURE. HERE IN CANADA A FARMER WAS SUED BECAUSE MOSANTO SUSPECTED HE US ...
read full comment

THE EUROPEANS HAVE BANNED THIS MOSANTO PRODUCTS AND THE GOVERNMENT MUST BE CAREFUL WITH THIS BILL OR IT WILL BRING HAVOCK ON GHANA IN AGRICULTURE IN THE FUTURE. HERE IN CANADA A FARMER WAS SUED BECAUSE MOSANTO SUSPECTED HE USED THEIR SEEDS ALTHOUGH THE SEEDS WERE BLOWN UNTO HIS FARM BY THE WIND. PLEASE, DO NOT SELL GHANA TO THESE GMOS' PRODUCTS. GHANA MUST STAND FIRM ON THIS. I KNOW SOME OF YOU WILL BE INFLUENCED BY MONEY. DO NOT GIVE IN OR YOU SHALL REGRET AND GHANA WILL PUBLISH YOUR NAMES OF HAVING SOLD GHANA SHORT IN THE FUTURE.
francis kwarteng 10 years ago

Hello friend,

Did you find the sources I gave you on Dr. Victor Lawrence useful?

Please let me know.

Thanks

Hello friend,

Did you find the sources I gave you on Dr. Victor Lawrence useful?

Please let me know.

Thanks

Stop Parliament Before It Is Too Late!

Read Comments .st0{display:none;fill:#14BDD3;} .st1{display:none;} .st2{display:inline;fill:#FC0F0F;} .st3{display:inline;fill:#FFFFFF;} .st4{display:inline;fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:6;stroke-miterlimit:10;} Comments (21)

Read Comments Comments (21)