Vives-Vallés Juan Antonio, Collonnier Cécile
University of the Balearic Islands, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Community Plant Variety Office, Angers, France.
Front Plant Sci. 2020 Mar 3;10:1813. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01813. eCollection 2019.
The Judgment of 25 July 2018 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was optimistically awaited by breeders and supporters of agricultural biotechnology, but shortly after the press release advancing the Judgment, hope turned into frustration. Opinions on how to frame the New Breeding Techniques (NBT) in the context of Directive 2001/18/EC were issued before the Judgment, while proposals to assist the EU legislator to amend the regime driven by the Directive have been also provided afterwards by scientists and institutional bodies around the EU. However, they do not seem to have paid so much attention to the Judgment itself. This paper focuses on the Judgment. It finds out that while the impacts of the Judgment on the NBT might have been slightly overvalued, its potential negative effects on techniques of random mutagenesis and varieties breed through them have been generally underestimated if not absolutely overlooked. The analysis also shows that the Judgment does not preempt the possibility to exempt certain applications of some NBT from the scope of Directive 2001/18/EC, and, in fact, ODM, SDN1, and SDN2 might be, under certain conditions, easily exempted from its scope without the need of a deep legislative revolution nor even the amendment of Directive 2001/18/EC. As regards techniques of random mutagenesis and mutant varieties bred by means of those techniques, until action is taken by Member States (if finally taken), no real limitations upon them are to be feared. However, if Member States start to consider the path opened by the CJEU, then their regulation at an EU level should be readily explored in order to avoid further negative effects on plant breeding as well as on the free movement inside the EU of those varieties and the products thereof.
欧洲联盟法院(CJEU)2018年7月25日的判决受到了农业生物技术育种者和支持者的殷切期待,但在宣布该判决的新闻稿发布后不久,希望就变成了沮丧。在判决之前就已发表了关于如何在2001/18/EC指令框架内界定新育种技术(NBT)的意见,而欧盟各地的科学家和机构也在判决之后提出了协助欧盟立法者修订该指令所驱动制度的建议。然而,他们似乎并没有对判决本身给予太多关注。本文聚焦于该判决。研究发现,虽然判决对新育种技术的影响可能被略微高估了,但其对随机诱变技术以及通过这些技术培育的品种的潜在负面影响,如果不是被完全忽视的话,总体上也被低估了。分析还表明,该判决并未排除将某些新育种技术的特定应用排除在2001/18/EC指令范围之外的可能性,事实上,在某些条件下,定向诱变(ODM)、定点核酸酶1(SDN1)和定点核酸酶2(SDN2)可能很容易被排除在其范围之外,而无需进行深刻的立法变革,甚至无需修订2001/18/EC指令。至于随机诱变技术以及通过这些技术培育的突变品种,在成员国采取行动之前(如果最终采取行动的话),无需担心会对它们有真正的限制。然而,如果成员国开始考虑欧洲联盟法院开辟的道路,那么就应该立即探讨在欧盟层面进行监管,以避免对植物育种以及这些品种及其产品在欧盟内部的自由流通产生进一步的负面影响。