On 13 September 2018, the first hearing in the Hautala and Others v. EFSA legal case (T-329/17) will take place in Luxembourg.

Here is the press information submitted by the Verts/ALE Group of the European Parliament, which is at the origin of the complaint:

PRESS INFO – Brussels, 09/10/2018

Transparency/Lawsuit against EFSA- Monsanto and Cheminova

Hearing on 09/13/2018 in Luxembourg

In May 2017, the Greens/EFA MEPs Michèle Rivasi, Bart Staes, Heidi Hautala and Benedek Javór filed a complaint against EFSA before the EU Court of Justice for hindering access to documents in the context of the renewal procedure for glyphosate authorisation.

The first hearing will take place on Thursday 13 September 2018 at 2.30 p.m. in Luxembourg.

For the Greens/EFA Group, this lawsuit about transparency is crucial.

On the one hand, because access to information is a necessary condition for the proper functioning of our democracies, but also for scientific work.

On the other hand, because we believe that the Court must reaffirm the law, the primacy of health and environmental protection over trade secrets that are abusively invoked by the industry.

BRIEFING : http://extranet.greens-efa-service.eu/public/media/file/1/5698

Statement from Michèle Rivasi, coordinator of the PEST Committee and Board member of Justice Pesticides :

“No science is possible without transparency. Its validity and reliability are the result of a systematic process so the results can be replicated, peer reviewed and published. This condition is not fulfilled by the studies considered by EFSA which are protected by the trade secret imposed by Monsanto or Cheminova.

If European governments do not want to put in place the means to guarantee scientific independence but allow industry to manipulate the assessment of the products it wants to market, transparency is the only protection against conflicts of interest.

It is therefore our duty to demand transparency before the Court. EFSA’s mission to protect the health of our fellow citizens is far too important for us to accept that it should be hijacked for the benefit of private interests.”