Scientists told to explain GMO technology

By Prossy Nandudu

THE African Union has called on scientists in Uganda to come out and explain the good and bad in Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) for Ugandans to make their decisions.

At the moment, scientists have not yet come out with proper explanation regarding GMOs, which has created a gap between those who support and those against the bill.

“The bill in itself is not bad because it is one of the technologies that has been embraced elsewhere and agricultural production. The problem is that scientists are not coming out to explain to the people what GMOs are and related side effects,” said the commissioner for Agriculture at the African Union, Rhoda Tumusiime.

She said the explanation will help Ugandans to either embrace the technology or reject it depending on their own conclusions.

“Uganda has remained technologically behind and that is why we are not doing well. Let us understand the technology, identify the good and bad elements then weigh them and make a decision,” said Tumusiime.

Government passed the National Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy in 2008 and is now in advanced stages of passing the Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill, 2012 commonly known as the GMO law, specifically to promote Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in Uganda.

But some sections of the public have come out to oppose the bill saying Vital aspects of GMOs include the hyper use of the pesticide sold under trade name Roundup, which is not only too toxic to crops but also to human health and other environment.

The National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill, 2012 was tabled in the House by the chairperson of the Committee on Science and Technology, Denis Hamson Obua as a private members bill.

The Bill’s objective is to provide for development and general release of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in Uganda and to create a regulatory framework to facilitate safe development and application of biotechnology.

Ever since it was tabled, the Bill has attracted heated debate with its proponents pushing to have it passed hastily to facilitate research on genetically engineered crops in a bid to improve agricultural productivity, food security and nutrition but hose against it questioning its rationale.